Evaluation of artificial intelligence fall school program at Smart University of Medical Sciences

Babak Sabet, Hamed Khani, Ali Namaki, Amin Habibi, Somayeh Rajabzadeh, Sajad Shafiekhani
{"title":"Evaluation of artificial intelligence fall school program at Smart University of Medical Sciences","authors":"Babak Sabet, Hamed Khani, Ali Namaki, Amin Habibi, Somayeh Rajabzadeh, Sajad Shafiekhani","doi":"10.34172/rdme.2023.33142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Educational evaluation is one of the main pillars of educational systems, and course evaluation is a survey that students or course members complete at the end of a class or academic course. This study aims to evaluate the ‘Artificial Intelligence Fall School Program’ at Smart University of Medical Sciences. Methods: This study was conducted by collecting on various aspects of the course, including the course structure, teaching methods, instructors, scientific evaluations, and pre- and post-course tests. The course evaluation was conducted using an online questionnaire. In the initial phase of the study, the sample size was determined to be 96 participants, as calculated using Cochran’s formula. The research data were statistically analyzed at two levels: descriptive and inferential. Descriptive analysis was performed using statistical indicators such as frequency, percentage, and mean. The inferential analysis was conducted using the paired t test. Analyses were performed using SPSS 22. Results: From the viewpoint of the participants, all artificial intelligence (AI) schools in the field of medical sciences were deemed satisfactory. A paired t test was used to analyze and compare the pre-test and post-test scores of participants in the Fall AI schools. The results indicated an increase in the post-test scores of participants, following their involvement in the seven-week AI schools, compared to their pre-test scores. Conclusion: This evaluative study offers crucial insights into the effectiveness of the \"Fall AI Schools\" training program in fostering AI proficiency among medical professionals. The quantitative findings reveal a statistically significant positive response and learning outcomes among the participants across the seven specialized schools.","PeriodicalId":21087,"journal":{"name":"Research and Development in Medical Education","volume":"49 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research and Development in Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/rdme.2023.33142","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Educational evaluation is one of the main pillars of educational systems, and course evaluation is a survey that students or course members complete at the end of a class or academic course. This study aims to evaluate the ‘Artificial Intelligence Fall School Program’ at Smart University of Medical Sciences. Methods: This study was conducted by collecting on various aspects of the course, including the course structure, teaching methods, instructors, scientific evaluations, and pre- and post-course tests. The course evaluation was conducted using an online questionnaire. In the initial phase of the study, the sample size was determined to be 96 participants, as calculated using Cochran’s formula. The research data were statistically analyzed at two levels: descriptive and inferential. Descriptive analysis was performed using statistical indicators such as frequency, percentage, and mean. The inferential analysis was conducted using the paired t test. Analyses were performed using SPSS 22. Results: From the viewpoint of the participants, all artificial intelligence (AI) schools in the field of medical sciences were deemed satisfactory. A paired t test was used to analyze and compare the pre-test and post-test scores of participants in the Fall AI schools. The results indicated an increase in the post-test scores of participants, following their involvement in the seven-week AI schools, compared to their pre-test scores. Conclusion: This evaluative study offers crucial insights into the effectiveness of the "Fall AI Schools" training program in fostering AI proficiency among medical professionals. The quantitative findings reveal a statistically significant positive response and learning outcomes among the participants across the seven specialized schools.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
智能医科大学人工智能秋季学校项目评估
背景:教育评价是教育系统的主要支柱之一,课程评价是学生或课程成员在课堂或学术课程结束时完成的调查。本研究旨在对智能医科大学的 "人工智能秋季学校课程 "进行评估。方法:本研究通过收集课程的各个方面,包括课程结构、教学方法、授课教师、科学评价以及课前和课后测试来进行。课程评估采用在线问卷调查的方式进行。在研究的初始阶段,根据科克伦公式计算,确定样本量为 96 名参与者。研究数据在两个层面上进行了统计分析:描述性分析和推论性分析。描述性分析使用频率、百分比和平均值等统计指标。推论分析采用配对 t 检验。分析使用 SPSS 22 进行。结果从参与者的角度来看,医学科学领域的所有人工智能(AI)学校都被认为是令人满意的。使用配对 t 检验分析和比较了秋季人工智能学校学员的前测和后测分数。结果表明,学员在参加为期七周的人工智能学校学习后,其后测成绩比前测成绩有所提高。结论这项评估研究为 "秋季人工智能学校 "培训计划在提高医务人员人工智能能力方面的成效提供了重要的启示。定量研究结果表明,七所专业学校的学员在统计学上都取得了显著的积极反应和学习成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
The role of academic stress and scientific motivation in predicting research spirit among the students of medicalsciences The relationship between identity development and medical students’ performance in technology-integrated English language classrooms Challenges in the educational system of maxillofacial surgery residency training in Iran: Monodisciplinarity system or dual degree system? The use of social media (communication applications) in the training of medical students, especially oral and maxillofacial surgery residents in Iran Challenges and acceptance of e-teaching among medical professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1