ReviewCureus2025
Role of Artificial Intelligence in Gastroenterology Training (2005-2025): Trends, Tools, and Challenges.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past two decades, gastroenterology training (GI training) has undergone a significant transformation through the integration of advanced technologies, particularly artificial intelligence (AI). The emergence of AI as a transformative tool has facilitated notable changes in how GI trainees acquire knowledge and skills. Key applications of AI in this context include simulation-based learning, diagnostic decision support, and procedural skill acquisition. These AI-driven innovations are increasingly recognised for enhancing learning efficiency, improving diagnostic accuracy, and building procedural confidence among trainees. To explore the extent of AI's impact on GI education, a comprehensive literature review was conducted. The search followed PRISMA guidelines and focused on peer-reviewed articles published between 2005 and 2025. Databases such as PubMed/NCBI, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library were used, along with targeted searches in leading GI journals. The initial search yielded 312 records. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 22 studies were selected for final synthesis. These included randomised controlled trials, observational studies, systematic reviews, and narrative analyses. The reviewed studies consistently demonstrated that AI-enhanced simulation tools, particularly those incorporating virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), played a pivotal role in procedural training. These tools offered immersive, risk-free environments that allowed trainees to practice and refine their technical skills before applying them in real-world clinical scenarios. AI also proved valuable in diagnostic decision support. Systems such as computer-aided detection (CADe) were shown to significantly increase lesion detection rates during endoscopic procedures, contributing to improved clinical decision-making and better patient outcomes. Additionally, AI-assisted technologies enhanced procedural training by supporting more precise biopsy targeting and facilitating lesion identification during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). As per our review, the evidence suggests that AI technologies are making meaningful contributions to GI training by improving diagnostic capabilities, streamlining the learning process, and supporting technical skill acquisition. However, despite these promising developments, further research is necessary. Future studies should include multi-centre randomised controlled trials and longitudinal evaluations to establish long-term efficacy. Furthermore, efforts toward global standardisation of AI training tools and equitable access are essential to ensure that these technologies benefit trainees across diverse clinical settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.