GAI-based teaching and traditional teaching produce comparable knowledge acquisition scores in medical students¶

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? Pooled analysis of 11 RCTs found no statistically significant difference in knowledge acquisition scores between GAI-based and traditional teaching (SMD 0.27, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.85; p = 0.36). → 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

Random-effects meta-analysis of knowledge scores from all eleven included RCTs (395 GAI-based students and 391 traditional teaching students). The pooled SMD was "0.27, 95% CI −0.31 to 0.85" with p = 0.36 and I² = 93%; GRADE rated the evidence low quality.

"Meta-analysis with a random-effects model showed that there was no significant difference in knowledge scores between the groups (SMD 0.27, 95% CI −0.31 to 0.85; p = 0.36; I² = 93%; Fig. 3)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The evidence base for GAI-based teaching in medical education is of low quality with substantial heterogeneity and reporting gaps — related
• GenAI does not significantly improve clinical skills of clinical medicine students compared with traditional teaching — related
• GAI-assisted teaching significantly improves knowledge examination scores in medical students compared with traditional teaching (SMD = 0.95) — reports the opposite
• Blended teaching shows no significant difference in multiple-choice question scores compared to traditional teaching — related
• GenAI does not significantly improve knowledge exam scores of clinical medicine students compared with traditional teaching, with high heterogeneity — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• GAI-assisted teaching significantly improves learning self-efficacy compared with traditional teaching (SMD = 0.75) — related
• GAI-assisted teaching significantly increases student satisfaction with teaching compared with traditional teaching (SMD = 1.52; OR = 5.58) — related
• GAI-based teaching outperforms traditional teaching in practical skill development — related
• Nursing students show significant knowledge improvement with GenAI (SMD = 1.11) unlike clinical medicine students — related