Physician and the Machine: An Analysis of the Ethical Educational Use of Artificial Intelligence by Medical Students.
- 1Medicine, Centro Universitário de Brasília, Brasília, BRA.
Abstract
Background Artificial intelligence (AI) has been increasingly integrated into medical education, particularly through tools such as ChatGPT (OpenAI, California, US), Gemini (Google DeepMind, California, US), DeepSeek (Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Basic Technology Research Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China), and Microsoft Copilot (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, US). Although these resources present the potential to expand access to information and assist in academic development, their use also raises ethical concerns related to the reliability of information, technological dependence, plagiarism, superficial learning, and potential impairment of clinical reasoning. This study aimed to investigate the perception of medical students regarding the use of AI in their academic training, emphasizing perceived ethical limits and practices considered ideal for its utilization. Methods This was a quantitative, descriptive, and cross-sectional study conducted with medical students using a structured questionnaire administered via a digital form. Results The sample consisted of 120 participants, of whom 99.2% (n=119) reported having previously used AI tools for academic purposes. It was observed that 73.3% (n=88) of the students use AI recurrently, primarily for summarizing content, researching medical information, simulating clinical cases, resolving questions, drafting academic texts, and planning studies. Most participants acknowledged the positive contribution of AI to learning, with 60.0% (n=72) stating that these tools contribute significantly and 36.7% (n=44) stating they contribute to a limited extent. However, students also identified relevant risks, especially the reduction of their own clinical reasoning, technological dependence, lack of information reliability, superficial learning, and academic plagiarism. Furthermore, 83.3% (n=100) stated that they did not receive adequate institutional guidance on the use of these tools, and 67.5% (n=81) demonstrated an interest in receiving further training on the ethical and pedagogical use of AI. No participant (0.0%, n=0) advocated for the prohibition of AI in academic contexts, while 67.5% (n=81) considered that its use should be regulated with ethical and pedagogical criteria. Conclusions AI already significantly integrates the academic routine of medical students and is perceived as a useful resource for learning, but it is still used in a scenario of insufficient institutional guidance. The findings reinforce the need for curricular guidelines, faculty training, and specific ethical education to promote the critical, responsible, and pedagogically appropriate use of AI in medical training.
Related
- Generative artificial intelligence use and interpersonal educational interaction among nursing students: self-regulated learning as a statistical mediator
- Beyond Artificial Intelligence: Vocation and the Sacred Relationship Between Physician and Patient
- CT-Referenced Diagnostic Performance and Complementary Error Patterns of Artificial Intelligence Versus a Single Emergency Physician in Chest Radiograph Interpretation: A Retrospective Paired Diagnostic Accuracy Study
- Survey of Physician Attitudes on Artificial Intelligence
- The digital physician illusion: individual innovativeness, unlike artificial intelligence attitudes, drives rational drug use through health literacy.
BibTeX
@article{jesus2026physician,
title = {{Physician and the Machine: An Analysis of the Ethical Educational Use of Artificial Intelligence by Medical Students.}},
author = {Victor Hugo Policena de Jesus and Guilherme Cruvinel Jordão da Silveira and Pedro Enzo Camargo Luz and Luiza Letti Ferronatto and Thaís Bezerra Giovanini Fuscaldi and Enzo Villela de Faria and Kaio Albano Lopes and Igor Gifoni Aragão and Luisa Athayde Colnago and Alexandre Sampaio Rodrigues Pereira},
journal = {Cureus},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.7759/cureus.117761},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/43011953},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Physician and the Machine: An Analysis of the Ethical Educational Use of Artificial Intelligence by Medical Students.
AU - Victor Hugo Policena de Jesus
AU - Guilherme Cruvinel Jordão da Silveira
AU - Pedro Enzo Camargo Luz
AU - Luiza Letti Ferronatto
AU - Thaís Bezerra Giovanini Fuscaldi
AU - Enzo Villela de Faria
AU - Kaio Albano Lopes
AU - Igor Gifoni Aragão
AU - Luisa Athayde Colnago
AU - Alexandre Sampaio Rodrigues Pereira
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/11
JO - Cureus
DO - 10.7759/cureus.117761
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/43011953
AB - Background Artificial intelligence (AI) has been increasingly integrated into medical education, particularly through tools such as ChatGPT (OpenAI, California, US), Gemini (Google DeepMind, California, US), DeepSeek (Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Basic Technology Research Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China), and Microsoft Copilot (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, US). Although these resources present the potential to expand access to information and assist in academic development, their use also raises ethical concerns related to the reliability of information, technological dependence, plagiarism, superficial learning, and potential impairment of clinical reasoning. This study aimed to investigate the perception of medical students regarding the use of AI in their academic training, emphasizing perceived ethical limits and practices considered ideal for its utilization. Methods This was a quantitative, descriptive, and cross-sectional study conducted with medical students using a structured questionnaire administered via a digital form. Results The sample consisted of 120 participants, of whom 99.2% (n=119) reported having previously used AI tools for academic purposes. It was observed that 73.3% (n=88) of the students use AI recurrently, primarily for summarizing content, researching medical information, simulating clinical cases, resolving questions, drafting academic texts, and planning studies. Most participants acknowledged the positive contribution of AI to learning, with 60.0% (n=72) stating that these tools contribute significantly and 36.7% (n=44) stating they contribute to a limited extent. However, students also identified relevant risks, especially the reduction of their own clinical reasoning, technological dependence, lack of information reliability, superficial learning, and academic plagiarism. Furthermore, 83.3% (n=100) stated that they did not receive adequate institutional guidance on the use of these tools, and 67.5% (n=81) demonstrated an interest in receiving further training on the ethical and pedagogical use of AI. No participant (0.0%, n=0) advocated for the prohibition of AI in academic contexts, while 67.5% (n=81) considered that its use should be regulated with ethical and pedagogical criteria. Conclusions AI already significantly integrates the academic routine of medical students and is perceived as a useful resource for learning, but it is still used in a scenario of insufficient institutional guidance. The findings reinforce the need for curricular guidelines, faculty training, and specific ethical education to promote the critical, responsible, and pedagogically appropriate use of AI in medical training.
SN - 2168-8184
ER -