Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 29, Issue 12, pp 1584–1585 | Cite as

Technology in Medical Education—Osler Meets Watson

  • James A. ColbertEmail author
  • Dave A. Chokshi

Over the past 20 years, new technologies have changed the experience of practicing medicine at a breakneck pace. A growing number of physicians now use an electronic health record, transmit e-prescriptions, access clinical references on a smartphone, and complete continuing medical education (CME) online. Similarly, today’s millennial-generation medical students are digital natives who inhabit a milieu of online connectivity that renders them unique from prior generations of students. Textbooks have become electronic and lectures are moving online, yet the ultimate goal of medical training is no different today than it was 100 years ago: to prepare future physicians to be effective communicators, diagnosticians and healers as embodied by the great William Osler.

Recently, there has been much enthusiasm for utilizing novel technology in medical education. Yale School of Medicine gives each first-year medical student an iPad for personal use. Numerous schools videotape lectures and make...


Medical Student Medical Education Electronic Health Record Continue Medical Education Prior Generation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Khosla V. Technology will replace 80 % of what doctors do. Fortune Magazine. Available at: (Accessed 6/24/14)
  2. 2.
    Block L, Habicht R, Wu AW, et al. In the wake of the 2003 and 2011 duty hours regulations, how do internal medicine interns spend their time? J Gen Intern Med 2013;28(8):1042–7.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cristia J, Cueto S, Ibarraran P, Santiago A, Severin E. Technology and Child Development: Evidence from the One Laptop per Child Program. Inter-American Development Bank. 2012;(February).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies, Washington, D.C., 2010.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Victoria J, Rideout MA, Ulla G, Foehr PD, Donald F, Roberts PD. Generation M2; Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds. Menlo Park: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation; 2010.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dellasega DRGC. Social media in medical education: two innovative pilot studies. Med Educ. 2011;45(11):1158–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Newton-Wellesley HospitalNewtonUSA
  2. 2.Division of Medical Communications, Brigham and Women’s HospitalBostonUSA
  3. 3.Langone Medical CenterNew York UniversityNew YorkUSA
  4. 4.New York State Department of HealthNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations