Over the past year, artificial intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT have become increasingly integrated into our daily lives. As residency interview season continues, it's important to consider the implications of these AI tools and how applicants, letter writers, and programs can use them as a source of content, ideas, and effort. This paper explores the current state of AI-related policy, applicant perspectives, and strategies for managing a range of emerging issues this application season and beyond.
ChatGPT, an AI model developed by OpenAI, works on the principle of word prediction, learning from vast amounts of text data and then stitching together the most likely words to create a coherent sentence. Masu. As a result, surprisingly complex document content can be generated from simple prompts in seconds. This content can be refined using more detailed requests.
Although this generative capacity is impressive, it does not necessarily reflect understanding or reality. ChatGPT's responses are driven by training data to reflect the limitations, inaccuracies, and even potential biases of the source content. In its current form, it provides access to the Internet but does not necessarily provide real-time information. Additionally, by design, we do not provide information that OpenAI deems potentially harmful, including information about individuals. They also tend to produce long, vague, and overly cautious answers.1～3
The emergence of AI as a potential tool for surgical research and education is considered by some to be cause for alarm. Many of the major journals in the academic surgical field have taken a cautious stance, refraining from using AI models like ChatGPT in the production of academic papers.4,5 Similarly, many medical schools are now enacting policies that discourage or outright ban the use of AI in academic work. This reflects broader attitudes in academia and public life, with numerous articles appearing in the popular press and academic press about AI tools and their impact on education at all levels; , it is also impacting industries that rely heavily on documents such as technical writing and books. Legal expert.6,7
In response, some companies are implementing new tools that attempt to detect the use of AI, similar to existing software programs widely used by academic institutions to detect plagiarism. The results of these efforts are incomplete.8 Plagiarism detection software typically compares new writing to existing published works, but trying to compare writing to something generated by an AI can be difficult because the AI output may differ based on slight differences in wording or specific wording. It's more difficult given that things are so different. ChatGPT User's chat history. For example, a user can ask her ChatGPT to generate multiple versions of a particular sentence based on the same prompt and choose from different sections. Users can also provide samples of their writing to her ChatGPT and request new writing in the same style or voice. Given this complexity, it is unlikely, if ever, that “AI detectors” will reach a level of accuracy that will be useful in the near future.
Medical students are at the forefront of this change, potentially benefiting from its introduction, but also facing growing pains as new technologies are integrated across disciplines, including academic writing, publishing, and the profession. There is a possibility. Communication and your own learning experience. In an effort to understand their perspectives and experiences, we completed structured interviews with medical students at our institution who are applying to plastic surgery residencies this year. As expected, applicants are aware of his AI tools, and many have started using them for learning, preparation, and content generation. For example, some students use ChatGPT to help them understand complex concepts by asking for simple explanations or structuring information into tables and lists to use as study guides. reported that it is. Additionally, some students reported that he uses ChatGPT to write first drafts of school assignments, generate title suggestions for manuscripts, and proofread emails and cover letters. . While students generally feel positively about AI tools as useful adjuncts to their activities, there are certain potential uses, particularly for faculty to write letters of recommendation or review applications. They also expressed concerns about the potential use of AI tools. The responses of these medical students are summarized in Figure 1.
While each new technology brings its own challenges, we believe that embracing innovation is in line with the values of our profession. In the field of academic collaboration, the use of tools such as ChatGPT can be likened to the early stages of mentorship or partnership. Just as students and residents prepare preliminary manuscripts under the guidance of senior researchers, ChatGPT can efficiently provide a foundational structure from which more sophisticated writing can be built. Much like the drafts and first insights of a novice researcher, this provides a starting point and starting point for ideas for iterative refinement.
However, just as these partnerships with students and residents require oversight, expertise, and modification, ChatGPT-generated content is generally not fully polished, especially in technical academic writing settings. does not produce any products. ChatGPT is therefore very useful in the early stages of academic writing and ultimately for refining language and detecting errors, but it complements rather than replaces expertise and critical thinking. It also has the potential to streamline and speed up the writing process, allowing users to focus their energy on idea generation and refinement rather than drafting and wording.
The rise of AI tools and virtual interfaces, combined with the declining use of numerical measures such as grades and test scores in medical education, has created a challenging environment for surgical training programs and applicants. The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated a shift to virtual interviews, making the application process more accessible, albeit less nuanced and personal. While objective information about the show can be easily conveyed through virtual means, the less visible human aspects of the interview process are not so easily conveyed. With the rise of AI tools that can easily simulate verbal sophistication and professional written communication, the opportunity to meet applicants in person, and for them to experience the program first-hand, has become even more valuable.
The extent to which AI will be integrated into the surgical residency application process remains to be seen. However, given its potential as an educational resource, a source of ideas, and a tool to improve productivity and efficiency, it is worth exploring, even if concerns about attribution and authorship persist. Students are likely to continue exploring the possibilities of this new technology alongside their surgical education and should be encouraged to express their curiosity safely and transparently. To achieve this goal, it is equally important that programs and faculty understand these tools and their potential uses in surgical research and education.
