Actionable companion · Assessment and evidence of learning
From evidence to district action: Use of and confidence in YouTube and ChatGPT in surgical teaching and training
AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. The district actions are proposed applications, not findings or recommendations attributed to the original authors. No additional peer review is asserted.
Evidence and context
Health-professions education context: test transfer to K–12 rather than assuming it.
Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the linked source license:
Abstract Background Today, YouTube and ChatGPT are used for a wide variety of purposes, ranging from entertainment to complex teaching. The content needs neither external approval nor quality assurance. We investigated how often doctors used YouTube and ChatGPT, how widespread their use was and the degree of confidence doctors had in these resources for teaching and training surgical procedures. Methods In November 2023, we conducted a survey among doctors working in all the surgical departments of the University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø. The questionnaire assessed use of and confidence in YouTube and ChatGPT and background data. For our analysis, we used frequency tables and association analysis. The study formed the basis for the second-year thesis of the first authors. Results Out of a total of 152 doctors, 96 participated. Among the participants, 97% used YouTube and 14% used ChatGPT for teaching or training. There was no significant correlation between work experience and use (YouTube: p = 0.14, ChatGPT: p = 0.88). YouTube was used every month by 48%, while 2% used ChatGPT monthly. 60% of the doctors had a medium level of confidence that the content of YouTube was consistent with Norwegian procedures and standards, while 69% had low confidence in this aspect for ChatGPT. Conclusions In November 2023, there was frequent and widespread use of YouTube to teach and train surgical procedures. The ChatGPT language model was rarely used, and the doctors had low confidence in its content. The future use of online learning platforms, language models and artificial intelligence for surgery training has an uncertain potential that warrants further research. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-025-07992-0. Keywords: Surgical training, Medical education, YouTube, ChatGPT, Artificial intelligence
A 90-day district pilot
- Days 1–15 · Appraise. Have the curriculum lead and a teacher read the methods and limitations. Record the study design, sample, comparator, outcomes and evidence gaps. Define a local question that the study can help inform.
- Days 16–30 · Design. Redesign one low-stakes assessment: require a first attempt, an AI-assisted revision, a source-check log and a short oral explanation. Use the same rubric for the comparison task. Name an accountable owner and set the baseline, success threshold and budget before implementation.
- Days 31–60 · Test. Start with a small voluntary cohort, preserve an accessible non-AI route and require teacher review. Use synthetic or de-identified examples; approve data handling and tool terms through district processes.
- Days 61–90 · Decide. Blind-score reasoning, factual accuracy and unaided transfer on a fresh task. Record suspected misconduct separately from demonstrated evidence. Compare with baseline, document uncertainty and stop or revise if learning worsens, access is unequal or critical errors persist.
The board decision brief
Report the learning problem, evidence quality, participating population, total cost including review time, measured benefit, errors, access differences and remaining uncertainties. Make a dated recommendation to stop, revise or expand. A positive perception survey alone does not establish learning improvement.
Attribution and reuse
Stefan Tajsic; Imre Stjern-Vik; Dana Meknas; Martin Harbitz Bruusgaard. Use of and confidence in YouTube and ChatGPT in surgical teaching and training. BMC Medical Education (2025-10-28). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07992-0
Companion prepared 2026-10-30. Original authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract is an attributed source extract; the implementation plan is new AI-assisted editorial material, offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license. This guide has not undergone independent peer review.