GAI-based teaching yields higher knowledge scores in practice courses but not theory courses¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Learning with GAI in practice courses resulted in higher knowledge scores (SMD 0.89, 95% CI 0.25–1.54; p < 0.01), whereas it had little effect on theory courses (SMD −0.25). → Li Juan 2025

Evidence¶

Li Juan 2025¶

Li Juan, Yin Kaiyu, Wang Yida, Jiang Xiaoqin, Chen Dongxu. (2025). Effectiveness of generative artificial intelligence-based teaching versus traditional teaching methods in medical education: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07750-2

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r2

Subgroup analysis by course classification across the included RCTs. Practice courses (5 studies, 154 GAI vs 151 traditional) showed a pooled effect size of SMD = 0.89 (95% CI 0.25–1.54, p < 0.01); theory courses (6 studies) showed SMD −0.25 (95% CI −1.00 to 0.50); subgroup-difference p = 0.02.

"Practice course 5 154 151 0.89 [0.25, 1.54] Random 86% < 0.01"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• GAI-based teaching improves knowledge scores when learning duration exceeds one week — related
• GAI-assisted teaching significantly improves knowledge examination scores in medical students compared with traditional teaching (SMD = 0.95) — a broader claim this one bears on
• GAI-based teaching outperforms traditional teaching in practical skill development — related
• PBL teaching yields higher knowledge scores than traditional teaching in orthopaedics education — related