Health profession students’ perceptions of ChatGPT in healthcare and education: insights from a mixed-methods study | BMC Medical Education

General characteristics of the study population (Table 1)

The study population (n = 217) was predominantly female (85.7%), with an average age of 26.9 ± 5.7 years (range 18—52 years). A total of 190 (82.3%) students were born in Israel, and more than 90% identified as Jewish, 4.6% as Muslim, and 0.5% as Christian. A significant proportion (65.4%) of the participants were either married or cohabiting. Geographically, the residential distribution of students was as follows: 43.9% in the Center of Israel, 18.9% in Northern Israel, 14.1% in the South, and 10.7% in Jerusalem. Nearly 60% of the participants were in their first and second years of study, and they reported a mean of academic achievement during their studies of 7.6 (± 1.5), with scores ranging from 2 to 10 on a scale of 1–10.

ChatGPT usage patterns among the study population

Among the 217 students surveyed, 187 (86.2%) reported familiarity with ChatGPT and provided insights into their reasons for use and usage habits. Notably, the percentages were comparably high across the different disciplines, with 60 (82.2%) nursing, 57 (87.7%) medical, and 70 (88.6%) other health profession students. Students reported that their familiarity with ChatGPT developed through friends and family members (78.1%), media (66.8%), interaction with other students (40.1%), and exposure during classes with lecturers (14.4%). Interestingly, 43.1% of students reported using ChatGPT infrequently, while only 7.6% indicated daily use [Mean 2.6 (SD = 1.1) on a scale of 1–6]. Nevertheless, nearly one-fifth reported feeling absolutely confident in their use of the chat, while only 10.7% reported feeling not confident at all [Mean 3.9 (SD = 1.1) on a scale of 1–5].

Perceptions of ChatGPT

Table 2 presents the mean scores regarding both the positive and negative perceptions of ChatGPT among the study population. The data reveal a generally positive attitude towards ChatGPT use, with an overall mean score of 4.04 (SD = 0.62) on a scale from 1 to 5, where a higher score indicates a more favorable perception of the positive impacts. In contrast, the mean score for negative impacts was 3.49 (SD = 0.64) on the same 1 to 5 scale, which reflects a moderate level of concern regarding potentially negative effects. A one-way ANOVA test was employed to assess potential differences among the nursing, medical, and other health profession student groups. The analysis did not reveal any statistically significant differences among the groups. Further analyses using t-tests for independent samples were conducted to examine whether there were any differences in the mean scores between students in their first year versus later years, as well as between those who completed the survey in March–April or May–June. Neither of these comparisons yielded significant differences.

Academic and learning skill enhancement due to using ChatGPT

The mean scores in this area ranged from 1.82 (SD = 1.21) to 3.26 (SD = 1.45), with the lowest score assigned to management skills and the highest to curiosity. The overall mean score was 3.20 (SD = 0.63) on a scale of 1–5, indicating perceptions of a moderate level of enhancement due to using ChatGPT.

Concerns regarding ChatGPT use in education

Concerns regarding ChatGPT usage in education were scored in a rather variable manner, with the lowest scores assigned to the statements ‘I’m afraid that ChatGPT technology is “spying on us”‘ (Mean = 2.46; SD = 1.27) and ‘I fear that the use of ChatGPT technology is unethical’ (Mean = 2.58; SD = 1.14). Similarly, ‘I am afraid that lecturers will fail students who use the ChatGPT technology’ received a mean score of 3.72 (SD = 1.36), while ‘I am afraid that lecturers will oppose students’ use of technology’ was scored 3.63 (SD = 1.34). The highest level of concern was attributed to ‘I am afraid that lecturers are not open to the use of ChatGPT technology by students’ with a mean score of 3.816 (SD = 1.27).

Qualitative data

The majority of students (n = 128; 68.5%) responded to the three open-ended questions. Using the constant comparative analysis method, three main themes emerged, each encompassing two key findings: one highlighting benefits and positive aspects, and the other addressing challenges and concerns.

Theme 1: experience with ChatGPT

Benefits and positive experiences

Most students consider ChatGPT to be a useful and convenient tool for accessing information and knowledge. They consistently mentioned: “It is seen as a time-saving solution, helping to streamline research and gather relevant materials quickly”. They also appreciated the assistance provided in reading and summarizing academic material, and valued the convenience in finding relevant sources, especially for research seminars. As one nursing student noted: “I see ChatGPT as a platform for answering specific questions and providing guidance in various subjects”. They also acknowledge the vast potential of ChatGPT, especially the advanced versions with improved interfaces and databases. As one occupational therapy student mentioned: “The tool is a source of inspiration, and fosters creative thinking and curiosity”. A medical students noted: “I was working on analyzing patient data for trends in treatment outcomes to provide an alternative care plan. ChatGPT helped me quickly generate initial conclusions about why the alternative care plan is better.”

Challenges and concerns

Despite its advantages, some students expressed skepticism about ChatGPT’s reliability. Several participants expressed concerns about ChatGPT’s citation practices, noting that the lack of proper sourcing undermines its reliability. As one student explained, “Sometimes it gives information without citing sources, and that makes me hesitant to trust it completely.” Moreover, other students pointed out that ChatGPT may sometimes provide incorrect or fabricated information, with one stating, “There are times when it gives answers that just don’t make sense or aren’t accurate at all.” The ability of the software to understand and answer specific questions was also queried, as another student noted, “Sometimes, it struggles to answer specific clinical questions accurately, which can be frustrating.” Additionally, some students admitted that they had not fully explored ChatGPT’s capabilities and were open to further experimentation, with one nursing student mentioning, “I’m still learning how to use it effectively, and I’m curious to see what else it can do.”

Theme 2: impact on quality of healthcare

Benefits and positive effects

The majority of students voiced optimism about the positive effects that ChatGPT could have on healthcare. They anticipated benefits such as “faster diagnosis, increased knowledge of patients, and more efficient access to information.” Notably, students considered ChatGPT a valuable tool for identifying suitable treatment routes based on patient data. One medical student commented, “Using ChatGPT, I can quickly generate differential diagnoses based on symptoms, which helps me think through the possibilities more effectively.” An occupational therapy student added, “It’s like having a second opinion on hand at all times; I can bounce ideas off it and refine my understanding of patient care.”

Moreover, students expressed confidence in the potential of ChatGPT to reduce human errors and improve the quality of care. As one student put it, “I believe that the technology will lead to more accurate diagnoses and personalized treatment plans in healthcare.” Another student remarked, “With ChatGPT assisting us, we can double-check our work and minimize mistakes, especially in critical situations.” Furthermore, a third student stated, “The integration of ChatGPT in clinical practice could mean fewer misdiagnoses, as it can highlight important data we might overlook.”

The students also anticipated that ChatGPT would provide efficient access to information, which they believe could enhance their work. For example, one student mentioned, “ChatGPT can expedite tasks, provide immediate answers, and assist in organizing information.” Another student noted, “Having quick access to evidence-based guidelines through ChatGPT saves us so much time when making clinical decisions.” A third student added, “It’s like having a digital assistant that can quickly pull up relevant studies and data, allowing me to focus more on patient interaction.”

Furthermore, some students perceived ChatGPT as a tool to enhance their knowledge and improve decision-making in patient care. One participant noted, “Using ChatGPT allows me to explore various treatment options and understand the implications of each choice.” They expressed the idea that “a patient can take part in decision making,” as another student commented, “With the information from ChatGPT, I can engage patients more effectively in their care plans.”

Challenges and concerns

Concerns emerged about the risk of overreliance on technology potentially diminishing the personal touch essential in patient interactions. One student warned, “If we rely too much on technology, we might lose the personal touch that is crucial in patient care.” Others expressed fears that increased reliance on technology might lead to more analytical and robotic interactions with patients. As one nursing student emphasized, “Beyond the capabilities of ChatGPT, there is still a need for human judgment and a more comprehensive understanding of the patient.”

Further concerns were raised about the potential of technology to impact healthcare negatively, as described by a student: “heavy reliance on technology may decrease the quality of treatment.” Another student cautioned, “We must be careful not to let ChatGPT replace critical thinking; otherwise, we risk oversimplifying complex patient scenarios.” Additionally, some students also expressed a concern that patients might avoid traditional healthcare services because of the easy access to information through ChatGPT. One participant warned, “Patients may start to think they can get all their answers online and not seek professional help, which could be dangerous.”

Theme 3: integration into the curriculum

Benefits and positive impacts

Students advocated for formal training on effective incorporation of ChatGPT within their studies. They expressed a belief that integrating this tool into educational frameworks could foster innovative learning approaches. Many recognized its ability to streamline tasks and provide quick access to information, which they found beneficial for managing their workloads. One nursing student mentioned, “It saves me hours when I need to find relevant studies or summarize long texts quickly.” Another student echoed this, stating, “With ChatGPT, I can easily access multiple sources of information without sifting through endless articles.” Essentially, ChatGPT is seen as a source of professional guidance, helping students when they are uncertain about their next steps studies or research. As one physiotherapy student said, “I hope it will contribute to more informed decision-making and enhance my knowledge and understanding in the field.” Another student remarked, “When I’m stuck on a topic, ChatGPT helps me brainstorm ideas and get back on track.”

Challenges and concerns

Some students expressed reservations about an overreliance on ChatGPT, particularly for replacing traditional learning or research methods. One student stated, “I worry that relying too much on ChatGPT might make us lazy in our research and learning. We still need to engage with the material ourselves.” Another student noted, “While ChatGPT is helpful, it shouldn’t be our only source. We need to continue developing our research skills.”

Additionally, there are concerns regarding the ethical use of ChatGPT and its limitations. A student remarked, “I think we need clear guidelines on how to use ChatGPT ethically, especially in academic settings.” Another participant pointed out, “Understanding the limitations of ChatGPT is important; it can’t replace the depths of knowledge we gain from traditional learning methods.”