Skip to Main Content (Press Enter)

Logo UNISR
  • ×
  • Home
  • People
  • Outputs
  • Organizations
  • Expertise & Skills

UNIFIND
Logo UNISR

|

UNIFIND

unisr.it
  • ×
  • Home
  • People
  • Outputs
  • Organizations
  • Expertise & Skills
  1. Outputs

Impact of Clinical Decision Support Systems on Medical Students’ Case-Solving Performance: Comparison Study with a Focus Group

Academic Article
Publication Date:
2025
Short description:
Impact of Clinical Decision Support Systems on Medical Students’ Case-Solving Performance: Comparison Study with a Focus Group / Montagna, M., Chiabrando, F., De Lorenzo, R., Querini, P.R.. - In: JMIR MEDICAL EDUCATION. - ISSN 2369-3762. - 11:(2025). [10.2196/55709]
abstract:
Background: Health care practitioners use clinical decision support systems (CDSS) as an aid in the crucial task of clinical reasoning and decision-making. Traditional CDSS are online repositories (ORs) and clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Recently, large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have emerged as potential alternatives. They have proven to be powerful, innovative tools, yet they are not devoid of worrisome risks. Objective: This study aims to explore how medical students perform in an evaluated clinical case through the use of different Methods: The authors randomly divided medical students into 3 groups, CPG, n=6 (38%); OR, n=5 (31%); and ChatGPT, n=5 (31%); and assigned each group a different type of CDSS for guidance in answering prespecified questions, assessing how students' speed and ability at resolving the same clinical case varied accordingly. External reviewers evaluated all answers based on accuracy and completeness metrics (score: 1-5). The authors analyzed and categorized group scores according to the skill investigated: differential diagnosis, diagnostic workup, and clinical decision-making. Results: Answering time showed a trend for the ChatGPT group to be the fastest. The mean scores for completeness were as follows: CPG 4.0, OR 3.7, and ChatGPT 3.8 (P=.49). The mean scores for accuracy were as follows: CPG 4.0, OR 3.3, and ChatGPT 3.7 (P=.02). Aggregating scores according to the 3 students' skill domains, trends in differences among the groups emerge more clearly, with the CPG group that performed best in nearly all domains and maintained almost perfect alignment Conclusions: This hands-on session provided valuable insights into the potential perks and associated pitfalls of LLMs in medical education and practice. It suggested the critical need to include teachings in medical degree courses on how to properly take advantage of LLMs, as the potential for misuse is evident and real.
Iris type:
1.1 Articolo in rivista
List of contributors:
Montagna, M.; Chiabrando, F.; De Lorenzo, R.; Querini, P. R.
Handle:
https://iris.unisr.it/handle/20.500.11768/196677
Full Text:
https://iris.unisr.it//retrieve/handle/20.500.11768/196677/347661/mededu-2025-1-e55709.pdf
Published in:
JMIR MEDICAL EDUCATION
Journal
  • Overview

Overview

URL

https://mededu.jmir.org/2025/1/e55709
  • Use of cookies

Powered by VIVO | Designed by Cineca | 26.9.2.0