Human Oversight in an Algorithmic Era: Preserving Integrity in Medical Assessment

Artificial intelligence is rapidly entering health professions education, particularly in assessment where efficiency, scalability, and standardization are highly valued. While AI systems can generate items, score written responses, and support structured evaluations, their limitations become apparent when assessment involves complex professional behaviours, contextual judgment, and ethical responsibility. Drawing on Miller’s Pyramid, ethical frameworks, and emerging literature on AI-enabled evaluation, this editorial argues that AI may support assessment at lower cognitive levels, but cannot replace human oversight at the “Shows How” and “Does” levels where communication, professionalism, empathy, and moral reasoning are demonstrated. Without careful governance, AI risks reinforcing bias, misclassifying competence, and disadvantaging learners from culturally diverse or Global South contexts. The responsible path forward is not to reject AI, but to embed it within a human-in-the-loop model in which educators retain authority and accountability for high-stakes decisions. As the field embraces AI, the central question becomes not what AI can do, but where its authority must end.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of University College of Medicine and Dentistry
Published
2026-01-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.51846/jucmd.v5i1.4994
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human Oversight in an Algorithmic Era: Preserving Integrity in Medical Assessment

Mariyah Hidayat, Ahsan Sethi
Journal of University College of Medicine and Dentistry
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Human Oversight in an Algorithmic Era: Preserving Integrity in Medical Assessment

Mariyah Hidayat, Ahsan Sethi
article en

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is rapidly entering health professions education, particularly in assessment where efficiency, scalability, and standardization are highly valued. While AI systems can generate items, score written responses, and support structured evaluations, their limitations become apparent when assessment involves complex professional behaviours, contextual judgment, and ethical responsibility. Drawing on Miller’s Pyramid, ethical frameworks, and emerging literature on AI-enabled evaluation, this editorial argues that AI may support assessment at lower cognitive levels, but cannot replace human oversight at the “Shows How” and “Does” levels where communication, professionalism, empathy, and moral reasoning are demonstrated. Without careful governance, AI risks reinforcing bias, misclassifying competence, and disadvantaging learners from culturally diverse or Global South contexts. The responsible path forward is not to reject AI, but to embed it within a human-in-the-loop model in which educators retain authority and accountability for high-stakes decisions. As the field embraces AI, the central question becomes not what AI can do, but where its authority must end.

Journal of University College of Medicine and DentistryVol. 5(1)
University of Lahore (PK), Qatar University (QA)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.