In academic research and writing, generative artificial intelligence (gAI) is becoming an increasingly useful tool. gAI can help researchers work more efficiently, think creatively, and manage different tasks throughout the research process. This review presents the basic functions of gAI and how it can be used in various types of research, including medical education research-from developing research questions and reviewing previous studies to analyzing data, writing drafts, proofreading, and translating texts. Understanding how these tools work and using them carefully can be greatly beneficial for researchers. For example, better results can be derived by using well-designed prompts and critically checking the gAI's output. However, important concerns also exist. gAI can sometimes produce information that sounds correct but is, in fact, wrong. Excessive reliance on gAI may also weaken important writing and thinking skills. In addition, questions concerning fairness, responsibility, and proper use need to be addressed. Clear rules and responsible use of gAI tools are essential. gAI should not replace human judgment or academic standards. However, if used thoughtfully, it can help improve the quality of writing and make research work more productive. It may also support researchers in Japan in sharing more of their work internationally. As medical education continues to develop, gAI has the potential to support better research practices-if it is used with care and a strong sense of responsibility.

Introduction: During their clinical clerkship (CC), Japanese medical students’ literature searching skills were ambiguous. We conducted a questionnaire survey on students’ search processes to determine whether this skill improved after a lecture on conducting searches.　Method: This study was conducted from May to December 2019. The questionnaire survey was followed by a 90-minute lecture combining information and relevant activities. The questionnaire included students’ self-evaluation of their literature searching abilities, and references from their medical summaries and reports were compared to those of students from a 2018 group who did not attend the lecture.　Results: Sixty-seven students participated in the questionnaire survey and lecture. Questionnaire results demonstrated that the most frequently used search tool was PubMed. Regularly used types of literature were Japanese textbooks medical guidelines issued by the Japanese Medical Society, and English-language medical journal articles. The two major difficulties in conducting searches were the inability to critically appraise the literature and inadequate English reading skills.　The students’ satisfaction level regarding the lecture was found to be acceptable. After attending the lecture, students’ self-evaluation of their literature searching abilities improved significantly. Furthermore, compared to the 2018 group, references in students’ summaries and reports increased. Additionally, the number of English-language medical journal articles cited in reports was higher among students in the 2019 group than the 2018 group.　Conclusions: Although CC students can conduct literature searches, they struggle with critical appraisal and English-language comprehension. Interventions such as lectures may effectively improve their searching skills during CC.

Addressing unprofessional behavior among medical students and residents presents a formidable challenge, characterized by the absence of straightforward solutions and a lack of established methodologies for remediation. Medical educators grapple with this issue, often experiencing physical and psychological strain. This seminar and workshop aimed to equip educators with fundamental strategies for managing students’ misconduct, featuring presentations from three universities pioneering innovative approaches within undergraduate education. Drawing from these insights, participants engaged in small group discussions, exchanging personal anecdotes and insights to glean actionable measures for immediate implementation in educational contexts. Below are the key highlights from each lecture and ensuing group deliberations.