Comparison of AI-generated and human-made animated videos for medical education: experts and students preferred AI over humans
Objective: This study compared medical students and experts, and evaluated a frames-to-video AI-generated problem-based learning (PBL) trigger against its scene-matched human-made animated counterpart in terms of evaluations and preferences. Study Design: A mixed-methods study was conducted at a med...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Murcia |
| Repositorio: | DIGITUM. Depósito Digital Institucional de la Universidad de Murcia |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:digitum.um.es:10201/201261 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doi.org/10.6018/edumed.677591 http://hdl.handle.net/10201/201261 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Video generation Problem-based learning Medical education Artificial intelligence No relacionado con ningún objetivo de desarrollo sostenible |
| Sumario: | Objective: This study compared medical students and experts, and evaluated a frames-to-video AI-generated problem-based learning (PBL) trigger against its scene-matched human-made animated counterpart in terms of evaluations and preferences. Study Design: A mixed-methods study was conducted at a medical school. Two scene- atched videos were used: an AI-generated video and an animated (human-made) video. Students (n=210; Years 2–5) viewed both videos in counterbalanced order and rated eight 5-point Likert items for each; they also indicated their preferred video for engagement, emotional impact, and PBL use. A multidisciplinary expert panel (n=104) evaluated only the AI video on comparable items and provided open-ended comments. Mann–Whitney-U tests compared experts with students on the AI video; Wilcoxon signed-rank tests compared students’ ratings across videos. Qualitative data nderwent thematic analysis. Results: Students rated the AI-generated video significantly higher than the animated video on all eight items (all p≤.026) and preferred it for engagement (83.8%), emotional impact (81.0%), and PBL use (79.0%). Experts’ ratings of the AI video were also high and exceeded students’ ratings on visual quality, distraction avoidance, and visual consistency (p≤.001). Qualitative themes highlighted realism, suitability for PBL sessions, and strong engagement, while suggested improvements included micro-continuity, pronunciation, and body language. Conclusion: Within the PBL context, a frames-to-video AI workflow produced a fully synthetic trigger that was preferred by students and endorsed by experts. AI-generated triggers appear feasible, acceptable, and educationally promising, provided attention is given to fine-grained audiovisual continuity and communication cues. |
|---|