Claims

GAI-assisted teaching significantly improves practical examination scores in medical students compared with traditional teaching (SMD = 1.48)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i3 large
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 i3 Pooled across 50 studies, GAI-assisted teaching significantly improved practical examination scores versus control (SMD = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.20–1.77). → 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 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r3

Random-effects meta-analysis of 50 studies (2,194 control, 2,088 experimental participants) reported in the practical examination scores section, showing "a significant improving effect on experimental skills scores" with high heterogeneity (I2 = 94%).

"Compared with the control group, the pooled effect of the studies (SMD = 1.48, 95%CI: 1.20–1.77, p < 0.00001) showed a significant improving effect on experimental skills scores in the group of GAI-assisted experiment teaching group."

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.