Surveyed veterinary students in Australia find ChatGPT practical and relevant while expressing no concern about artificial intelligence replacing veterinarians

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundChat Generative Pre‐trained Transformer (ChatGPT) is a freely available online artificial intelligence (AI) program capable of understanding and generating human‐like language. This study assessed veterinary students’ perceptions about ChatGPT in education and practice. It compared perceptions about ChatGPT between students who had completed a critical analysis task and those who had not.MethodsThis cross‐sectional study surveyed 498 Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM) students at The University of Sydney, Australia. Second‐year DVM students researched a veterinary pathogen and then completed a critical analysis of ChatGPT (version 3.5) output for the same pathogen. A survey based on the Technology Acceptance Model was then delivered to all DVM students from all years of the programme, collecting data using Likert‐style, categorical and free‐text items.ResultsOver 75% of the 100 respondents reported having used ChatGPT. The students found ChatGPT's output relevant and practical for their use but perceived it as inaccurate. They perceived ChatGPT output to be more useful for veterinary students than for pet owners or veterinarians. Those who had completed the critical analysis assignment had a more positive view of ChatGPT's practicality for veterinary students but noted its authoritative tone even when delivering inaccurate information. Over 50% of the students agreed that information about tools such as ChatGPT should be included in the veterinary curriculum. Students agreed that veterinarians should embrace AI but disagreed that AI would eventually replace the need for veterinarians.ConclusionsA critical appraisal of outputs from AI tools such as ChatGPT may help prepare future veterinarians for the effective use of these tools.