Rather than competing with algorithmic memory, medical education needs to cultivate “augmented clinicians” equipped with high AI literacy and profound humanness, ensuring technology enhances rather than displaces relational patient care.
Abstract
Background Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming medical education. While AI enhances personalized learning, its integration raises concerns regarding “cognitive outsourcing,” automation bias, and erosion of independent clinical reasoning. Aim & methods This narrative review critically evaluates the cognitive and educational impacts of generative AI and proposes structural realignment across the medical education continuum. We synthesized literature from major databases (PubMed, Scopus) focusing on AI's intersection with clinical reasoning and humanistic competencies. Main findings We identify three cognitive vulnerabilities: deskilling (loss of diagnostic abilities among advanced learners), never-skilling (failure to develop foundational mental models in junior trainees), and automation bias (uncritical acceptance of machine-generated recommendations). Traditional memory-based assessments, such as multiple-choice questions (MCQs), are increasingly insufficient for evaluating clinical readiness. Key recommendations Medical education needs to pivot towards methodologies AI cannot replicate, acknowledging that strategies like case-based learning (CBL) and problem-based learning (PBL) are not novel but are now urgently necessitated by AI. We propose a division of labor where “AI treats the chart” while “humans treat the patient.” Undergraduate medical education (UME) is encouraged to prioritize pathophysiological reasoning to counter never-skilling; graduate medical education (GME) would benefit from emphasizing human-AI collaboration and deliberate reflection to counter deskilling and automation bias; continuing medical education (CME) may consider facilitating lifelong adaptation and structured “unlearning” of obsolete heuristics. Conclusion Rather than competing with algorithmic memory, medical education needs to cultivate “augmented clinicians” equipped with high AI literacy and profound humanness, ensuring technology enhances rather than displaces relational patient care.
BackgroundThe rapid integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into healthcare and industry is often framed as a threat to human roles. Within rehabilitation and occupational health, this polarized discourse risks obscuring more nuanced possibilities for human-AI collaboration.ObjectiveThis article challenges the domi...
Abstract Generative AI is driving medical education from digital support toward intelligent, interactive learning environments. The cultivation of doctor-patient communication skills requires not only technical proficiency but also communication competence, emotional sensitivity, and ethical judgment. This paper propos...
Chuanling Jia, Lulu Qi· JMIR Medical Education· 0 citations
GenAI should be viewed as a powerful augmentative tool, not a replacement for human educators, and its successful integration will depend on leveraging its strengths to enhance efficiency and scalability while preserving the essential humanistic elements of medical practice through expert oversight and validation.
R. Xie, Bei-En Zhang, Li-Feng Xiao· Frontiers in Medicine· 0 citations
The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is moving higher education beyond the digitization of resources toward interactive, personalized, and intelligent learning support. Although GenAI has been widely discussed in language learning, writing, engineering, and medical education, university g...
Shang Liang, Jian-Kang Yao· Journal of Contemporary Econ...· 0 citations
AI appears most defensible as an augmentative educational partner that strengthens feedback, personalization, and competency-based progression, rather than as an autonomous substitute for educators.
Malek Zarei, M. Mozaffari, Yasamin Hajiani· Currents in Pharmacy Teachin...· 0 citations
AIM/OBJECTIVE
To argue that generative AI (GenAI) poses a distinct threat to nursing credentialling, one that operates as cognitive substitution rather than cognitive supplement, and to examine why a prominent institutional response to GenAI in assessment, while well designed for general higher education, fails when ap...
Andrew Brenner, Amanda Müller· Nurse Education in Practice· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.