Neither geographical location nor assessment timing moderated the comparative effectiveness of GAI-based teaching on knowledge scores¶

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

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Subgroup analyses found that geographical location (Asia versus Europe) and assessment timing (immediate versus delayed) did not influence the comparative effectiveness of the two teaching methods on knowledge scores. → 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 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Predetermined subgroup analyses of knowledge scores across the included RCTs: Asia SMD 0.25 (p = 0.55) versus Europe SMD 0.31 (p = 0.32), subgroup-difference p = 0.90; immediate SMD 0.04 (p = 0.88) versus delayed SMD 0.82 (p = 0.16), subgroup-difference p = 0.24.

"Neither the geographical location of instruction implementation nor the timing of student achievement assessment influenced the comparative effectiveness of the two teaching methods on theoretical achievement."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Geographical region significantly moderates AI literacy intervention effects, with Europe and East Asia outperforming North America — related
• ECE effects are significant in Europe and Asia but did not reach statistical significance in the Americas — related
• The ToM–achievement association is significantly weaker in European samples than in Asian and North American samples — related
• Geographical region moderated several engagement-correlate relations, with Eastern students showing higher relations than Western students — related