METHODS: This cross-sectional study was carried out between May and June 2023 to assess the potential and problems that pharmacists observed while integrating chatbots powered by AI (ChatGPT) in pharmacy practice. The correlation between perceived benefits and concerns was evaluated using Spearman's rho correlation due to the data's non-normal distribution.Any pharmacists licensed by the Jordanian Pharmacists Association were included in the study. A convenient sampling technique was used to choose the participants, and the study questionnaire was distributed utilizing an online medium (Facebook and WhatsApp). Anyone who expressed interest in taking part was given a link to the study's instructions so they may read them before giving their electronic consent and accessing the survey.
RESULTS: The potential advantages of ChatGPT in the pharmacy practice were widely acknowledged by the participants. The majority of participants (69.9%) concurred that educational material about pharmacy items or therapeutic areas can be provided using ChatGPT, with 66.9% of respondents believing that ChatGPT is a machine learning algorithm. Concerns about the accuracy of AI-generated responses were also prevalent. More than half of the participants (55.7%) raised the possibility that AI systems such as ChatGPT could pick up on and replicate prejudices and discriminatory patterns from the data they were trained on. Analysis shows a statistically significant positive link, albeit a minor one, between the perceived advantages of ChatGPT and its drawbacks (r = 0.255, p
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how medical students perceive ChatGPT for educational purposes and to assess its perceived advantages and disadvantages.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out using a questionnaire with five main domains to explore Jordanian medical students' perceptions, practices, and concerns regarding the ChatGPT. This study was conducted from May to July, 2023, and the data were collected using the convenience sampling technique through Google Forms shared within medical students' Facebook groups. Descriptive statistics summarised participant demographics, while logistic regression identified factors influencing ChatGPT usage. Variables with a P-value ≤ 0.05 in multiple regression were considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: Nearly two-thirds (N = 136, 61.5%) claimed to have knowledge of AI but not in clinical settings. Most participants (88.5%, N = 216) were aware of ChatGPT, with 86.9% (N = 212) agreeing that 'Medical students can benefit from using ChatGPT.' Additionally, 83.2% (N = 203) felt that 'ChatGPT helps students quickly and easily summarize complex information.' Conversely, 78.3% (N = 191) expressed concerns about ChatGPT's potential inaccuracies, with accuracy and reliability cited as primary concerns. Multiple logistic regression showed that younger students (OR = 0.902, P = 0.025) and those with lower proficiency (OR = 0.487, P = 0.007) used ChatGPT more frequently than others.
CONCLUSION: Although the use of the ChatGPT could be more beneficial for aiding students in developing medical knowledge, evidence-based academic regulations should guide its use. Future research should be conducted to examine the enablers and barriers to ChatGPT use in medical education.