Related Experiment Videos
Equipping the next generation: addressing the unmet need for artificial intelligence education at research performing
Jeremy Y Ng1,2,3,4, Wid Al-Zahraa Al-Khafaji5,6, David Moher7,8,9
1Institute of General Practice and Interprofessional Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Osianderstr. 5, Tübingen, 72076, Germany. ngjy2@mcmaster.ca.
Background:
The integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools into higher education is rapidly accelerating, yet the educational ecosystem appears largely unprepared for the scale and speed of adoption. Our recent international survey of over 1,200 university students and postdoctoral fellows in the medical and life sciences found that while more than 80% had used GenAI tools, the vast majority had received no formal training, and many were unaware of any institutional policies governing their use. This gap between adoption and institutional preparedness may pose risks to research integrity if left unaddressed.
Main Body:
Existing research supports a coordinated, evidence-informed approach to AI education in research performing organizations (RPOs), grounded in principles of research integrity, equity, and critical engagement with technology. First, GenAI literacy must be embedded as a core competency in scientific and clinical education, equipping students to critically evaluate tool outputs, recognize hallucination and bias, and understand the distinction between AI-generated inaccuracy and deliberate research misconduct. Second, traditional frameworks for academic integrity would benefit from re-examination. Today, GenAI tools have fundamentally disrupted established notions of authorship, originality, and plagiarism, and the absence of coherent institutional guidance leaves students and educators navigating these questions without support. Third, RPOs must develop clear, transparent, and context-sensitive policies on GenAI use by embedding responsible AI education into curricula, equipping learners not only to use these tools effectively, but to question, verify, and critique their outputs in ways that uphold scientific standards.
Conclusion:
RPOs have an urgent responsibility to move beyond reactive responses and toward proactive strategies that uphold scientific standards, promote equity of access, and prepare the next generation of researchers and clinicians to engage with GenAI responsibly and ethically.
