Background/Aim: To evaluate the performance of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT), a large language model trained by Open artificial intelligence. Materials and Methods: This study has three main steps to evaluate the effectiveness of ChatGPT in the urologic field. The first step involved 35 questions from our institution\'s experts, who have at least 10 years of experience in their fields. The responses of ChatGPT versions were qualitatively compared with the responses of urology residents to the same questions. The second step assesses the reliability of ChatGPT versions in answering current debate topics. The third step was to assess the reliability of ChatGPT versions in providing medical recommendations and directives to patients\' commonly asked questions during the outpatient and inpatient clinic. Results: In the first step, version 4 provided correct answers to 25 questions out of 35 while version 3.5 provided only 19 (71.4% vs 54%). It was observed that residents in their last year of education in our clinic also provided a mean of 25 correct answers, and 4th year residents provided a mean of 19.3 correct responses. The second step involved evaluating the response of both versions to debate situations in urology, and it was found that both versions provided variable and inappropriate results. In the last step, both versions had a similar success rate in providing recommendations and guidance to patients based on expert ratings. Conclusion: The difference between the two versions of the 35 questions in the first step of the study was thought to be due to the improvement of ChatGPT\'s literature and data synthesis abilities. It may be a logical approach to use ChatGPT versions to inform the nonhealth care providers\' questions with quick and safe answers but should not be used to as a diagnostic tool or make a choice among different treatment modalities.

UNASSIGNED: Group debate is an educational strategy meant to equip undergraduate students with enhanced communication skills as well as the understanding of complex topics. Many controversial topics in the microbiological field pose challenges to the pharmacist\'s ability to attribute a specific opinion to its supported clinical evidence and to discuss these topics with confidence.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 76 second-year pharmacy students who enrolled in a PharmD program participated in the group debate as part of the student assessment in microbiology course. The students prepared selected topics on controversial issues in microbiology, which were presented as a debate. Post-debate questionnaire was distributed to the students and used to measure student perceptions.
UNASSIGNED: The majority of the students (82.89%) demonstrated an improvement in their understanding of the topics after the debate. The highest percentage was recorded from one topic group (97.37%) which stated that they had improved understanding after the debate. About a third of the total students reported great improvement in their communication skills.
UNASSIGNED: This debate group clearly provided the students with high confidence in presenting their arguments from relevant scientific information gathered from existing literature. It also enhanced their understanding of complex and controversial microbiology topics that will be needed during their pharmacy education.

BACKGROUND: This study introduces the curriculum of a discussion-based learning class for dental hygiene ethics education and evaluates the educational effect of discussion-based learning as applied to a dental hygiene ethics class.
METHODS: This study was conducted with 48 sophomores from the Department of Dental Hygiene who took dental hygiene ethics in the second semester of 2019. For the DBL class, the following steps were conducted: (1) a pre-class group activity (discussion); (2) a group presentation and team discussion; and (3) a discussion among all groups. To improve the ability to aggregate, organise, and prepare the learner\'s resources, data, information search skills, and opinions by the team and to improve communication skills by actively listening to other people\'s opinions, the presentation team\'s opinions were modified after the discussion, and the performance of rational opinions on topics was added. The professor provided feedback and summarised and ended the discussion. The survey was conducted before and after the DBL class.
RESULTS: Concerning critical thinking ability, critical objectivity increased significantly from 8.88 before to 9.38 after the DBL class, and critical confidence also increased significantly. The change in professional attitude significantly increased from 3.21 out of 5 points before the DBL class to 3.53 after the DBL class in the logical and critical thinking skills category and significantly increased from 3.27 to 3.66 in decision-making skills.
CONCLUSIONS: Teaching methods applied in DBL classes, not traditional lecture-style classes, consistent with changing educational paradigms, are very effective and should change gradually. These results will be particularly helpful to faculty members who are inexperienced in DBL courses and performance but interested in them.

Debate has been shown to develop critical thinking skills, enhance communication, and encourage teamwork in a range of different disciplines, including nursing. The objective of this study was to explore students\' perceptions of the educational value of debate. A semi-structured focus group was conducted with 13 undergraduate Operating Department Practice students following a debate on the opt-out system of organ donation. Transcripts were analysed thematically, identifying three main themes that described the students\' perceptions of the debate. These were: (1) openness to diverse viewpoints; (2) developing non-technical skills, and (3) encouraging deep learning. The analysis showed participants perceived debate to be a valuable educational method that enhanced their learning. Engaging in debate encouraged students to critically reflect on their prior beliefs about organ donation-in some cases leading them to reconsider their original position. The findings from this study suggest that debate can be a valuable pedagogical tool to incorporate into healthcare education. Future research should consider the use of debate to develop non-technical skills that have utility in healthcare.

To describe implementation and lessons learned from use of a mock trial as a teaching-learning and assessment activity in a required evidence-based practice course. This innovative self-directed learning strategy reinforced evidence-based skills and affective domain competencies in Center for the Advancement of Pharmaceutical Education (CAPE) 2013 Outcomes and Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) Standards 2016.
During spring semesters 2015 and 2016, first professional year (P1) cohorts were divided into teams and assigned controversial topics to research and debate in mock trials. The activity provided opportunities for teaching-learning and assessment. Statistical analysis included inter-rater reliability (IRR), comparison of faculty-judge and student-juror evaluation of trial performance.
Two cohorts were divided into eight teams (four per cohort) to debate four issues. Students within each team were assigned individual scores. Mean individual scores are reported by trial/topic. Faculty-judges and student-jurors rated eight criteria including content/knowledge, critical thinking, application/discussion of federal/state law, citations/references, visual aids, delivery/style, and active listening. Analysis indicated students met competency expectations with overall judges\' and jurors\' mean scores above 54/60 points (90%) in 2015 and above 51/60 points (85%) in 2016. Judges\' scores showed a wider distribution than jurors\' scores. Peer evaluation mean scores were above 55/60 points in all four trials. Intra-class correlation was calculated. Judges\' scores had excellent IRR in two trials, and good IRR in a third trial, whereas jurors had good IRR in one trial.
Evaluation scores demonstrated students successfully applied knowledge and skills from this and prior P1 courses, and met competency expectations for the mock trial.