Evaluating Artificial Intelligence and Traditional Learning Tools for Chest X-Ray Interpretation: A Descriptive Study
- PMID: 40650493
- PMCID: PMC12254926
- DOI: 10.1111/tct.70139
Evaluating Artificial Intelligence and Traditional Learning Tools for Chest X-Ray Interpretation: A Descriptive Study
Erratum in
-
Correction to "Evaluating Artificial Intelligence and Traditional Learning Tools for Chest X-Ray Interpretation: A Descriptive Study".Clin Teach. 2025 Oct;22(5):e70169. doi: 10.1111/tct.70169. Clin Teach. 2025. PMID: 40754337 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Abstract
Background: Chest X-ray (CXR) interpretation is a fundamental yet challenging skill for medical students to master. Traditional resources like Radiopaedia offer extensive content, while newer artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as Chester, provide pattern recognition and real-time feedback. This study aims to evaluate Radiopaedia and Chester's effectiveness as educational tools and to explore student perspectives on AI.
Approach: A teaching session on CXR interpretation fundamentals was delivered to establish a standardised baseline of knowledge among participants, followed by a live tutorial introducing students to the functionality of both Chester AI and Radiopaedia. Students engaged with both tools to answer a 25-item workbook assessing complex CXR pathologies. CXRs were deliberately selected for their complexity to examine student engagement with online learning tools amid diagnostic uncertainty, encouraging applied clinical reasoning.
Evaluation: Preclinical medical students were recruited and randomly assigned to the Chester AI (n = 5) or Radiopaedia group (n = 5). During the workbook task, participants were instructed to engage with the workbook using Radiopaedia and Chester AI. Post-session, participants took part in focus groups to share their experiences. Thematic analysis highlighted Chester's efficiency and potential as a revision tool but noted limitations with complex CXR pathologies. Radiopaedia was valued for its comprehensiveness but was less efficient for the workbook task due to its vast array of content.
Implications: AI tools such as Chester show promise as complementary resources alongside traditional learning materials. Combining Chester's efficiency and real-time feedback with Radiopaedia's in-depth content may optimise learning and improve CXR interpretation skills.
Keywords: artificial intelligence; asynchronous; chest X‐ray; medical education; radiology; technology enhanced learning.
© 2025 The Author(s). The Clinical Teacher published by Association for the Study of Medical Education and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Figures
References
-
- Cheung T., Harianto H., Spanger M., Young A., and Wadhwa V., “Low Accuracy and Confidence in Chest Radiograph Interpretation Amongst Junior Doctors and Medical Students,” Internal Medicine Journal 48, no. 7 (2018): 864–868. - PubMed
-
- Radiopaedia. Available at: https://radiopaedia.org/ (© 2005‐2025 Radiopaedia.org; )
-
- El‐Ali A., Kamal F., Cabral C. L., and Squires J. H., “Comparison of Traditional and Web‐Based Medical Student Teaching by Radiology Residents,” Journal of the American College of Radiology 16, no. 4 Pt A (2019): 492–495. - PubMed
-
- Adams S. J., Henderson R. D. E., Yi X., and Babyn P., “Artificial Intelligence Solutions for Analysis of X‐Ray Images,” Can Assoc Radiol J 72, no. 1 (2021): 60–72. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
