Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) enables the production of coherent and contextually relevant text by processing large-scale linguistic datasets. Tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and LLaMA are increasingly integrated into medical education, assisting students with a range of tasks, including clinical reasoning, literature review, scientific writing, and formative assessment. Although these tools offer significant advantages in terms of productivity, personalization, and cognitive support, their impact on critical thinking-a cornerstone of medical education-remains uncertain. The aim of this viewpoint paper is to critically assess the influence of GenAI on critical thinking within medical training, examining both its potential to enhance cognitive skills and the risks it poses to cognitive autonomy. Users have reported increased efficiency and improved linguistic output; however, concerns have also been raised regarding the risk of cognitive overreliance. Current evidence presents a mixed picture, indicating both improvements in learner engagement and potential drawbacks such as passivity or susceptibility to misinformation. Without curricular integration that prioritizes ethical use, prompt engineering, and critical evaluation, GenAI may compromise the cognitive autonomy of medical students. Conversely, when thoughtfully embedded into pedagogical frameworks, these tools can act as cognitive enhancers-supporting, rather than replacing, clinical reasoning. Medical education must adapt to ensure that future physicians engage with GenAI in a critical, ethical, and context-aware manner, especially in complex decision-making scenarios. This transformation demands not only technological fluency but also reflective practice and sustained oversight by faculty and academic institutions.