Skilled academic/medical writing is critical to research communication. The fundamental sections of a scholarly manuscript are introduction, methods, results and discussion. The introduction of a medical manuscript is aimed at briefing readers on the clinical extent and public health context of the research problem. It must justify the essentialness of the research to the scientific community and reveal any underlying research novelty. Skillfully conceived, designed and performed research protocols that are unskillfully presented can lose scientific credibility and impact. Without research communication skills authors would not be able to display the usefulness of their research for the scientific community. Generally, research communication or medical writing training/skills is underrepresented in curricular systems of medical schools globally. This can challenge publication quality and quantity of early-career authors/researchers. The author presents the academic experience he accumulated through peer review and supervision of vast manuscripts and theses. This article aimed at presenting a comprehensive roadmap for academic writing of the introduction and at identifying its common pitfalls.

Keywords: gender equality policy; initial teacher education; teacher educators’ perceptions; gender perspective; university teaching; sustainable development; SDG5; SDG4.

As education continues to evolve in response to technological advancements, the concept of Education 5.0 has gained prominence. However, it is crucial to critically analyze the limitations and challenges of this model. This article presents a comprehensive examination of Education 5.0, identifies its drawbacks, and proposes a vision for Education 6.0. Through insightful case studies and discussions, this article aims to provide a nuanced perspective on the future of education.

The growing dependence on large language models (LLM)s highlights the urgent need to deepen trust in these technologies. Regular, rigorous validation of their expertise, especially in nuanced and intricate scenarios, is essential to ensure their readiness for clinical applications. Our study pioneers the exploration of LLM utility in the field of cardiology. We stand at the cusp of a transformative era where mature AI and LLMs, notably ChatGPT, GPT-4, and Google Bard, are poised to influence healthcare significantly. Recently, we put three available LLMs, OpenAI's ChatGPT-3.5, GPT-4.0, and Google's Bard, to the test against a significant Polish medical special-ization licensing exam (PES). The exams cover the scope of completed specialist training, focusing on diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, excluding invasive medical procedures and interven-tions. In our analysis, GPT-4 consistently outperformed the others, ranking first, with and Google Bard and ChatGPT- 3.5 following, respectively. The performance metrics underscore GPT-4's no-table potential in medical applications. Given a score improvement of over 23.5 % between two AI models released just four months apart, clinicians must stay informed and up-to-date about these rapidly evolving tools and their potential applications to clinical practice. Our results provide a snapshot of the current capabilities of these models, highlighting the nuanced performance dif-ferences when confronted with identical questions

Background and objectives: Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ME/CFS is a common complex multi-system disease with a significant impact on the quality of life of patients and their families, yet the majority of ME/CFS patients go unrecognised or undiagnosed. For two decades the medical education establishment in the UK has been challenged to remedy these failings, but little has changed. This study was designed to ascertain the current UK medical school education on ME/CFS and to identify challenges and opportunities to inform the future of medical education. Materials and methods: A questionnaire, developed under the guidance of the Medical Schools Council, was sent to all 34 UK Medical Schools to collect data for the academic year 2018-2019. Results: Responses were provided by 22 out of a total of 34 medical schools (65%). 59% of respondents taught ME/CFS, led by specialists drawn from 6 medical disciplines. Teaching delivery was usually by lecture; however, discussion case studies and e-learning were used. 7 schools included questions on ME/CFS in their examinations and 3 schools reported likely clinical exposure to ME/CFS patients. 64% of respondents were interested in receiving further teaching aids in ME/CFS. None of the schools shared details of their teaching syllabus so it was not possible to ascertain what students were being taught. Conclusions: UK medical school teaching in ME/CFS is shown to be inadequate. Several medical disciplines, with known differences about the disease, need to set these aside to give greater clarity in teaching undergraduates so they can more easily recognise and diagnose ME/CFS. Improvements are proposed in ME/CFS medical education consistent with the international paradigm shift in biomedical understanding of this disease. Many medical schools (64% of respondents) acknowledge this need by expressing a strong appetite for the development of further teaching aids and materials. The GMC and MSC are called upon to use their considerable influence to bring about the appropriate changes to medical school curricula so future doctors can recognise, diagnose and treat ME/CFS. The GMC should also consider creating a registered speciality encompassing ME/CFS, post viral fatigue and Long Covid.