Claims

GAI-assisted teaching significantly improves learning self-efficacy compared with traditional teaching (SMD = 0.75)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i2 Pooled across seven continuous-variable studies, learning self-efficacy was significantly higher in the GAI group (SMD = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.17–1.32). → Ma Xingming 2026

Evidence

Ma Xingming 2026

Ma Xingming, Liu Xianting, Sun Haojie. (2026). The effectiveness of GAI-assisted teaching methods in medical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1813108

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r3

Random-effects meta-analysis of seven continuous-variable studies reported in the learning self-efficacy section, with high heterogeneity (I2 = 88%); one dichotomous-variable study found no statistical difference (OR = 3.50, 95% CI: 0.92–13.32, p = 0.06).

"The results of the meta-analysis showed a significant improvement in learning self-efficacy in the experimental group compared with the control group (SMD = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.17–1.32, p < 0.00001)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.