Student perspectives on AI‐supported formative assessment in pharmacology

High-quality feedback is crucial for helping medical students understand and apply core concepts of pharmacology, yet personalized feedback is resource-intensive to produce. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers a potential solution, but little is known about students' perspectives on AI-generate...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:British journal of clinical pharmacology
Main Authors: Berg, Jon Andsnes, Repstad, Øyvind, Serkland, Trond Trætteberg, Mork, Tiril Egset, Bru, Christian, Tenstad, Olav, Kvernenes, Monika
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: England 29.08.2025
Subjects:
ISSN:0306-5251, 1365-2125, 1365-2125
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Abstract High-quality feedback is crucial for helping medical students understand and apply core concepts of pharmacology, yet personalized feedback is resource-intensive to produce. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers a potential solution, but little is known about students' perspectives on AI-generated feedback. This study investigated how medical students perceived and made use of AI feedback in a formative assessment while studying fundamental pharmacology. We used a qualitative approach to explore how third year medical students perceived AI score and feedback after completing a formative test containing eight short-answer questions on core concepts in pharmacology. Data were collected using focus groups (n = 11). In an iterative thematic approach, the transcripts were analysed and themes identified. Three themes representing factors that affect students' experiences with AI-generated feedback were identified in the analyses: (1) trustworthy and accessible feedback information, (2) aligning the feedback with the study programme and (3) student feedback literacy. Our findings illustrate the complex interplay between technological, contextual and individual factors in shaping the effectiveness of AI-supported formative assessment. Students found the AI-generated feedback to be useful and mostly reliable, but raised concerns regarding AI being overly positive, the timing and mandatory nature of the assessment, and the workload required to engage with lengthy narrative feedback comments. While AI tools have the potential to provide reliable, personalized and effective feedback, its implementation needs to ensure that students are equipped with feedback literacy and that the educational programme incentivizes meaningful engagement with feedback.
AbstractList High-quality feedback is crucial for helping medical students understand and apply core concepts of pharmacology, yet personalized feedback is resource-intensive to produce. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers a potential solution, but little is known about students' perspectives on AI-generated feedback. This study investigated how medical students perceived and made use of AI feedback in a formative assessment while studying fundamental pharmacology. We used a qualitative approach to explore how third year medical students perceived AI score and feedback after completing a formative test containing eight short-answer questions on core concepts in pharmacology. Data were collected using focus groups (n = 11). In an iterative thematic approach, the transcripts were analysed and themes identified. Three themes representing factors that affect students' experiences with AI-generated feedback were identified in the analyses: (1) trustworthy and accessible feedback information, (2) aligning the feedback with the study programme and (3) student feedback literacy. Our findings illustrate the complex interplay between technological, contextual and individual factors in shaping the effectiveness of AI-supported formative assessment. Students found the AI-generated feedback to be useful and mostly reliable, but raised concerns regarding AI being overly positive, the timing and mandatory nature of the assessment, and the workload required to engage with lengthy narrative feedback comments. While AI tools have the potential to provide reliable, personalized and effective feedback, its implementation needs to ensure that students are equipped with feedback literacy and that the educational programme incentivizes meaningful engagement with feedback.
High-quality feedback is crucial for helping medical students understand and apply core concepts of pharmacology, yet personalized feedback is resource-intensive to produce. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers a potential solution, but little is known about students' perspectives on AI-generated feedback. This study investigated how medical students perceived and made use of AI feedback in a formative assessment while studying fundamental pharmacology.AIMSHigh-quality feedback is crucial for helping medical students understand and apply core concepts of pharmacology, yet personalized feedback is resource-intensive to produce. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers a potential solution, but little is known about students' perspectives on AI-generated feedback. This study investigated how medical students perceived and made use of AI feedback in a formative assessment while studying fundamental pharmacology.We used a qualitative approach to explore how third year medical students perceived AI score and feedback after completing a formative test containing eight short-answer questions on core concepts in pharmacology. Data were collected using focus groups (n = 11). In an iterative thematic approach, the transcripts were analysed and themes identified.METHODSWe used a qualitative approach to explore how third year medical students perceived AI score and feedback after completing a formative test containing eight short-answer questions on core concepts in pharmacology. Data were collected using focus groups (n = 11). In an iterative thematic approach, the transcripts were analysed and themes identified.Three themes representing factors that affect students' experiences with AI-generated feedback were identified in the analyses: (1) trustworthy and accessible feedback information, (2) aligning the feedback with the study programme and (3) student feedback literacy.RESULTSThree themes representing factors that affect students' experiences with AI-generated feedback were identified in the analyses: (1) trustworthy and accessible feedback information, (2) aligning the feedback with the study programme and (3) student feedback literacy.Our findings illustrate the complex interplay between technological, contextual and individual factors in shaping the effectiveness of AI-supported formative assessment. Students found the AI-generated feedback to be useful and mostly reliable, but raised concerns regarding AI being overly positive, the timing and mandatory nature of the assessment, and the workload required to engage with lengthy narrative feedback comments. While AI tools have the potential to provide reliable, personalized and effective feedback, its implementation needs to ensure that students are equipped with feedback literacy and that the educational programme incentivizes meaningful engagement with feedback.CONCLUSIONSOur findings illustrate the complex interplay between technological, contextual and individual factors in shaping the effectiveness of AI-supported formative assessment. Students found the AI-generated feedback to be useful and mostly reliable, but raised concerns regarding AI being overly positive, the timing and mandatory nature of the assessment, and the workload required to engage with lengthy narrative feedback comments. While AI tools have the potential to provide reliable, personalized and effective feedback, its implementation needs to ensure that students are equipped with feedback literacy and that the educational programme incentivizes meaningful engagement with feedback.
Author Mork, Tiril Egset
Kvernenes, Monika
Repstad, Øyvind
Bru, Christian
Serkland, Trond Trætteberg
Berg, Jon Andsnes
Tenstad, Olav
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Jon Andsnes
  orcidid: 0000-0001-8583-6349
  surname: Berg
  fullname: Berg, Jon Andsnes
  organization: Department of Clinical Science, Faculty of Medicine University of Bergen Bergen Norway, Section of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Pharmacology Haukeland University Hospital Bergen Norway
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Øyvind
  orcidid: 0009-0002-2985-0423
  surname: Repstad
  fullname: Repstad, Øyvind
  organization: Faculty of Medicine University of Bergen Bergen Norway
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Trond Trætteberg
  orcidid: 0000-0001-7475-1147
  surname: Serkland
  fullname: Serkland, Trond Trætteberg
  organization: Department of Clinical Science, Faculty of Medicine University of Bergen Bergen Norway, Section of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Pharmacology Haukeland University Hospital Bergen Norway
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Tiril Egset
  orcidid: 0009-0009-7890-9170
  surname: Mork
  fullname: Mork, Tiril Egset
  organization: Faculty of Medicine University of Bergen Bergen Norway
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Christian
  surname: Bru
  fullname: Bru, Christian
  organization: Fjordbyte AS Bergen Norway
– sequence: 6
  givenname: Olav
  orcidid: 0000-0001-5833-2620
  surname: Tenstad
  fullname: Tenstad, Olav
  organization: Department of biomedicine University of Bergen Bergen Norway
– sequence: 7
  givenname: Monika
  orcidid: 0000-0002-6042-6383
  surname: Kvernenes
  fullname: Kvernenes, Monika
  organization: Center for medical education and Department of Clinical Medicine University of Bergen Bergen Norway
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40883861$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNo9kMlOwzAURS1URAdY8AMoS1ikeIiHLCvEUFGJBbCOHOcZgprY2AlSd3wC38iXkNLC6i7uee9KZ4pGrWsBoVOC5wRjelkaP5eYCnmAJoQJnlJC-QhNMMMi5ZSTMZrG-IYxYUTwIzTOsFJMCTJB949dX0HbJR5C9GC6-gNi4tpksfz-_Iq99y50UCXWhUZvy0THCDE225u6TfyrHgrj1u5lc4wOrV5HONnnDD3fXD9d3aWrh9vl1WKVGprJLtX5MJ9RnlMpS1FJpaxgSlYkz3GplbXK5JZLENxkNGMVyyVYKAUmBAzjJZuh891fH9x7D7ErmjoaWK91C66PBaOZYDznkg3o2R7tywaqwoe60WFT_AkYgIsdYIKLMYD9RwgutnKLQW7xK5f9ALNGbMM
Cites_doi 10.1080/02602938.2025.2501696
10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
10.1111/bcp.13491
10.1186/s12909‐024‐06026‐5
10.1016/j.ejphar.2025.177257
10.3390/ime3010004
10.1016/j.ejphar.2025.177256
10.1080/0142159X.2024.2445037
10.1080/03075079.2021.1894115
10.1080/02602938.2025.2502582
10.1080/0142159X.2020.1839035
10.1080/07294360.2019.1657807
10.3390/educsci12100717
10.1097/ACM.0000000000002971
10.1371/journal.pone.0079802
10.1080/02602938.2025.2459641
10.1037/0003‐066X.55.1.68
10.1111/medu.12744
10.1080/0142159X.2023.2208731
10.1007/978‐3‐030‐25112‐3_5
10.1007/978-3-319-69909-7_3470-2
10.1080/02602938.2022.2073434
10.3102/003465430298487
10.1111/bph.16000
10.1080/03075070600572090
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2025 British Pharmacological Society.
Copyright_xml – notice: 2025 British Pharmacological Society.
DBID AAYXX
CITATION
NPM
7X8
DOI 10.1002/bcp.70267
DatabaseName CrossRef
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: 7X8
  name: MEDLINE - Academic
  url: https://search.proquest.com/medline
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Pharmacy, Therapeutics, & Pharmacology
EISSN 1365-2125
ExternalDocumentID 40883861
10_1002_bcp_70267
Genre Journal Article
GrantInformation_xml – fundername: Universitetet i Bergen
  grantid: Incentive funds for study quality
– fundername: University of Bergen
– fundername: Universitetet i Bergen
  grantid: UiB Idé
GroupedDBID ---
.3N
.GA
05W
0R~
10A
1OC
23N
33P
36B
3SF
4.4
50Y
50Z
51W
51X
52M
52N
52O
52P
52R
52S
52T
52U
52V
52W
52X
5GY
5HH
5LA
5VS
66C
6J9
702
7PT
8-0
8-1
8-3
8-4
8-5
8UM
930
A01
A03
AAESR
AAEVG
AAHQN
AAIPD
AAMMB
AAMNL
AANLZ
AAONW
AAXRX
AAYCA
AAYXX
AAZKR
ABCQN
ABCUV
ABOCM
ABPVW
ABQWH
ABXGK
ACAHQ
ACCZN
ACFBH
ACGFO
ACGFS
ACGOF
ACMXC
ACPOU
ACXBN
ACXQS
ADBBV
ADBTR
ADEOM
ADIZJ
ADKYN
ADMGS
ADOZA
ADXAS
ADZMN
AEFGJ
AEGXH
AEIGN
AEIMD
AENEX
AEUYR
AEYWJ
AFBPY
AFEBI
AFFPM
AFGKR
AFWVQ
AFZJQ
AGHNM
AGXDD
AGYGG
AHBTC
AIACR
AIAGR
AIDQK
AIDYY
AITYG
AIURR
ALAGY
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
ALVPJ
AMBMR
AMYDB
AOIJS
ATUGU
AZBYB
AZVAB
BAFTC
BAWUL
BFHJK
BHBCM
BMXJE
BROTX
BRXPI
BY8
C45
CITATION
CS3
D-6
D-7
D-E
D-F
DCZOG
DPXWK
DR2
DRFUL
DRMAN
DRSTM
DU5
E3Z
EBS
F00
F01
F04
F5P
FUBAC
G-S
G.N
GODZA
H.X
HGLYW
HZI
HZ~
IHE
IX1
J0M
K48
KBYEO
LATKE
LC2
LC3
LEEKS
LH4
LITHE
LOXES
LP6
LP7
LSO
LUTES
LYRES
MEWTI
MK4
MRFUL
MRMAN
MRSTM
MSFUL
MSMAN
MSSTM
MXFUL
MXMAN
MXSTM
N04
N05
N9A
NF~
O66
O8X
O9-
OIG
OK1
OVD
P2P
P2W
P2X
P2Z
P4B
P4D
Q.N
Q11
QB0
R.K
ROL
RX1
SUPJJ
TEORI
TR2
UB1
V8K
W8V
W99
WBKPD
WHWMO
WIH
WIJ
WIK
WIN
WOHZO
WQJ
WVDHM
WXI
WXSBR
XG1
YFH
YOC
YUY
ZZTAW
~IA
~WT
ALUQN
NPM
7X8
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c247t-a94084259277b6d788f6387d1990ba8ff8c9f57e65c4243d397efeb6011ec35b3
ISICitedReferencesCount 0
ISICitedReferencesURI http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=001563362000001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
ISSN 0306-5251
1365-2125
IngestDate Sat Nov 01 14:15:06 EDT 2025
Thu Sep 04 05:04:59 EDT 2025
Sat Nov 29 06:55:12 EST 2025
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Keywords feedback literacy
formative assessment
artificial intelligence
Language English
License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
2025 British Pharmacological Society.
LinkModel OpenURL
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c247t-a94084259277b6d788f6387d1990ba8ff8c9f57e65c4243d397efeb6011ec35b3
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ORCID 0000-0001-7475-1147
0009-0009-7890-9170
0000-0001-5833-2620
0009-0002-2985-0423
0000-0002-6042-6383
0000-0001-8583-6349
PMID 40883861
PQID 3246359573
PQPubID 23479
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_3246359573
pubmed_primary_40883861
crossref_primary_10_1002_bcp_70267
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2025-08-29
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2025-08-29
PublicationDate_xml – month: 08
  year: 2025
  text: 2025-08-29
  day: 29
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace England
PublicationPlace_xml – name: England
PublicationTitle British journal of clinical pharmacology
PublicationTitleAlternate Br J Clin Pharmacol
PublicationYear 2025
References e_1_2_10_23_1
e_1_2_10_24_1
e_1_2_10_21_1
e_1_2_10_22_1
e_1_2_10_20_1
e_1_2_10_2_1
e_1_2_10_4_1
e_1_2_10_18_1
e_1_2_10_3_1
e_1_2_10_19_1
e_1_2_10_6_1
e_1_2_10_16_1
e_1_2_10_5_1
e_1_2_10_17_1
e_1_2_10_8_1
e_1_2_10_14_1
e_1_2_10_7_1
e_1_2_10_15_1
e_1_2_10_12_1
e_1_2_10_9_1
e_1_2_10_13_1
e_1_2_10_10_1
e_1_2_10_11_1
e_1_2_10_27_1
e_1_2_10_25_1
e_1_2_10_26_1
References_xml – ident: e_1_2_10_19_1
  doi: 10.1080/02602938.2025.2501696
– ident: e_1_2_10_14_1
  doi: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
– ident: e_1_2_10_7_1
  doi: 10.1111/bcp.13491
– ident: e_1_2_10_9_1
  doi: 10.1186/s12909‐024‐06026‐5
– ident: e_1_2_10_3_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2025.177257
– ident: e_1_2_10_10_1
  doi: 10.3390/ime3010004
– ident: e_1_2_10_4_1
  doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2025.177256
– ident: e_1_2_10_8_1
  doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2024.2445037
– ident: e_1_2_10_23_1
  doi: 10.1080/03075079.2021.1894115
– ident: e_1_2_10_18_1
  doi: 10.1080/02602938.2025.2502582
– ident: e_1_2_10_27_1
  doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1839035
– ident: e_1_2_10_13_1
  doi: 10.1080/07294360.2019.1657807
– ident: e_1_2_10_25_1
  doi: 10.3390/educsci12100717
– ident: e_1_2_10_20_1
  doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002971
– ident: e_1_2_10_6_1
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0079802
– ident: e_1_2_10_26_1
– ident: e_1_2_10_12_1
  doi: 10.1080/02602938.2025.2459641
– ident: e_1_2_10_24_1
  doi: 10.1037/0003‐066X.55.1.68
– ident: e_1_2_10_21_1
  doi: 10.1111/medu.12744
– ident: e_1_2_10_11_1
  doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2023.2208731
– ident: e_1_2_10_15_1
  doi: 10.1007/978‐3‐030‐25112‐3_5
– ident: e_1_2_10_17_1
  doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-69909-7_3470-2
– ident: e_1_2_10_22_1
  doi: 10.1080/02602938.2022.2073434
– ident: e_1_2_10_5_1
  doi: 10.3102/003465430298487
– ident: e_1_2_10_2_1
  doi: 10.1111/bph.16000
– ident: e_1_2_10_16_1
  doi: 10.1080/03075070600572090
SSID ssj0013165
Score 2.4672976
SecondaryResourceType online_first
Snippet High-quality feedback is crucial for helping medical students understand and apply core concepts of pharmacology, yet personalized feedback is...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
crossref
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
Title Student perspectives on AI‐supported formative assessment in pharmacology
URI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40883861
https://www.proquest.com/docview/3246359573
WOSCitedRecordID wos001563362000001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
journalDatabaseRights – providerCode: PRVWIB
  databaseName: Wiley Online Library - Journals
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 1365-2125
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: false
  ssIdentifier: ssj0013165
  issn: 0306-5251
  databaseCode: DRFUL
  dateStart: 19970101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com
  providerName: Wiley-Blackwell
link http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1Lb9NAEF6lLQcuiDfhUS0I9dIa7PVjd48RtKICVRGkUm6WvV6jiGoT2UnU3voT-I38EmYfXqdESOXAxYosrR3vjMczO9_3LUJvSQxZQFnxoOCyChLIOQJGhAwgWciKWtRpKoTZbIKenbHplI8Hg-uOC7O-oEqxy0u--K-mhnNgbE2d_Qdz-4vCCfgNRocjmB2OtzL8N6tWqQWJOxqlaQmMTj2woV0tjJ551XEX1_Kw8BKdBljeK1rf7Ps6DaQNwQnPrdwaY-g_jUP8Ko2dbFUPWYTUHzJT42C6W8_Z1XqmKr_iI5sfHehy0miSzcQ29bPlUnpZLosWtmDvWTO7ODz-3jpGt1vJIKlemnXLHY7BFWZQGDsBWmkDskHhRZYcvRXurXxsKRbvqN5Jq_-mdX38Pz51HoBoxZpJDkNzM3QH7RGacoiUex-_npx_6TtRkdmO1P-3Tp0qJO_9fW_mNH8pVEzCMrmP7rlKA4-shzxAA6keooOxNdLVEZ70zLv2CB_g8Yb5HqHPzo3wphvhucKj01_XP70DYe9AuHcgPFN40xkeo_OT48mHT4HbeCMQJKFLeG-TULdnOaG0zCrKWA1hmlYRpC5lweqaCV6nVGapSEgSV5DTylqWUNtHUsRpGT9Bu2qu5DOE46LSretYJqxOyiLlskxDUkQypJKXVTREb7qpyxdWXyXfMs4Qve4mNYfop1tahZLzVZtDOZBpajmNh-ipnW1_GXgGFrMsen6bW7xAd3uXfIl2l81KvkJ3xBpeqmYf7dAp23eu8RvyPIiZ
linkProvider Wiley-Blackwell
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Student+perspectives+on+AI%E2%80%90supported+formative+assessment+in+pharmacology&rft.jtitle=British+journal+of+clinical+pharmacology&rft.au=Berg%2C+Jon+Andsnes&rft.au=Repstad%2C+%C3%98yvind&rft.au=Serkland%2C+Trond+Tr%C3%A6tteberg&rft.au=Mork%2C+Tiril+Egset&rft.date=2025-08-29&rft.issn=0306-5251&rft.eissn=1365-2125&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002%2Fbcp.70267&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1002_bcp_70267
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0306-5251&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0306-5251&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0306-5251&client=summon