<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>barriers to AI education in Indian medical institutions &#8211; Science</title>
	<atom:link href="https://scienmag.com/tag/barriers-to-ai-education-in-indian-medical-institutions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://scienmag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2026 22:33:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3</generator>

 
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">73899611</site>	<item>
		<title>North Indian trainees show limited AI knowledge and interest in training</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/north-indian-trainees-show-limited-ai-knowledge-and-interest-in-training/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Courtney Benton]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2026 22:33:47 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Science Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI awareness among resident doctors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI training in medical education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Artificial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Artificial Intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attitudes toward AI adoption in healthcare training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[barriers to AI education in Indian medical institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ChatGPT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comparative analysis of AI knowledge between medical students]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cross-sectional survey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cross-sectional survey on AI exposure in Indian medical colleges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethics and data governance in AI healthcare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[integration of AI tools in medical curriculum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interest in structured AI training for healthcare professionals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medical students]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical students AI knowledge in North India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[North India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[resident doctors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self-reported AI proficiency in North Indian medical students]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[usage of ChatGPT by medical trainees]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=346131</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A cross-sectional survey of 194 trainees at a North Indian hospital found limited AI knowledge and formal exposure, low ethical awareness and strong interest in structured training.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An exploratory cross-sectional survey of 194 medical students and resident doctors at a tertiary care teaching hospital in North India found that most participants rated their artificial intelligence knowledge as poor to average. The study also found that formal exposure to AI was uncommon, more than 80% of respondents reported limited or no familiarity with ethical and data-governance issues, and a large majority expressed interest in structured AI education. The results provide a baseline picture of self-reported knowledge, exposure, tool use and attitudes at one institution rather than evidence across India’s medical-training system.</p>
<p>The questionnaire covered MBBS students and resident doctors: 113 participants were medical students and 81 were resident doctors. Researchers asked respondents about their knowledge of AI, exposure to it within the medical curriculum, current use of AI tools, awareness of ethical considerations and attitudes toward future training. They analyzed the responses descriptively and used non-parametric statistical tests for comparisons between students and residents. Knowledge ratings did not differ significantly between the two groups, with a Mann–Whitney U value of 4853 and a p-value of 0.764.</p>
<p>ChatGPT was the most frequently used AI tool among respondents. Educational and academic purposes were the main reported uses, including language correction, literature review and manuscript preparation. The survey establishes that ChatGPT was the tool most often named and describes the activities in which it was used; it does not quantify how often participants used it or show that use of AI improved learning, research quality or clinical performance. Ethical and data-governance awareness was substantially lower: over 80% of respondents said they had limited familiarity with these issues or none at all.</p>
<p>Despite their limited formal exposure and generally modest self-assessed knowledge, a large majority of participants said they were interested in structured education about AI and its implications. The authors therefore presented the findings as baseline evidence for integrating AI-related competencies, including ethical and data-governance considerations, into medical training programs. Because the survey was questionnaire-based and cross-sectional, it captured reported attitudes and experiences at a single point in time. It did not test an educational intervention, measure changes over time, compare institutions or establish effects on clinical care, and its results should not be generalized beyond the surveyed trainees without further evidence.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> Self-reported AI knowledge, use, ethics awareness and training interest among medical students and resident doctors at a North Indian teaching hospital</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Artificial intelligence in medicine: a cross-sectional study of knowledge and attitudes</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> Gupta, I., Garg, A., Varadarajan, A., Jain, S., &amp; Wig, N. (2026). Artificial intelligence in medicine: a cross-sectional study of knowledge and attitudes. <em>BMC Medical Education</em>. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10052-w" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10052-w</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10052-w" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1186/s12909-026-10052-w</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> artificial intelligence, medical education, medical students, resident doctors, ChatGPT, AI ethics, data governance, cross-sectional survey, North India, Artificial, intelligence, medicine</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">346131</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
