- ICH GCP
- Yhdysvaltain kliinisten tutkimusten rekisteri
- Kliininen tutkimus NCT07618819
AI-Assisted Structured Guidance for Narrative Review Writing
Effect of Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Structured Guidance on the Quality of Narrative Literature Reviews Among Medical Postgraduate Students: A Randomized Controlled Educational Study
Tutkimuksen yleiskatsaus
Tila
Interventio / Hoito
Yksityiskohtainen kuvaus
Generative artificial intelligence is increasingly used by medical students and postgraduate trainees for literature searching, summarization, outlining, and academic writing. However, free use of AI may be associated with inaccurate information, unsupported statements, fabricated references, and inadequate academic judgment. This study is designed to evaluate whether structured guidance can improve the quality and academic integrity of AI-assisted narrative review writing.
Participants will be medical postgraduate students enrolled in an academic writing course. After informed consent and baseline data collection, participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to an AI-assisted structured guidance group or a free AI use group. Both groups will complete a narrative literature review of approximately 2,000 Chinese characters according to the same course requirements and may use AI tools under academic integrity requirements.
Participants in the AI-assisted structured guidance group will receive one structured guidance session approximately two weeks before final submission. The session will be based on the six SANRA dimensions: explanation of the importance of the article, statement of aims or questions, description of the literature search, reference support for key statements, scientific reasoning, and appropriate presentation of data and content. The instructor will provide directional and methodological feedback but will not directly write or edit the students' text line by line. Participants in the free AI use group will complete the review according to the same course requirements without the structured guidance session.
After submission, all narrative reviews will be anonymized and assessed by independent outcome assessors blinded to group allocation. The primary outcome is the final SANRA total score. Secondary outcomes include SANRA item scores, multiple-source academic writing self-efficacy, and reference authenticity error rate.
Opintotyyppi
Ilmoittautuminen (Arvioitu)
Vaihe
- Ei sovellettavissa
Yhteystiedot ja paikat
Opiskeluyhteys
- Nimi: Guangming Jin
- Puhelinnumero: +86-13560035613
- Sähköposti: jinguangming@gzzoc.com
Opiskelupaikat
-
-
Guangdong
-
Guangzhou, Guangdong, Kiina, 510060
- Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University
-
-
Osallistumiskriteerit
Kelpoisuusvaatimukset
Opintokelpoiset iät
- Aikuinen
- Vanhempi Aikuinen
Hyväksyy terveitä vapaaehtoisia
Kuvaus
Inclusion Criteria:
- Master's students enrolled in the Academic Standards and Thesis Writing course.
- Willing to participate in this study, able to understand the study procedures and randomization arrangement, and able to provide written informed consent.
- Able to complete literature searching, use AI tools, and complete online questionnaires.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Students who have confirmed withdrawal from the course, suspension of study, long-term leave, or other known objective reasons that prevent participation in subsequent major teaching activities and study procedures.
- Students who have participated in pilot testing, intervention material development, assessment training, or data processing related to this study.
Opintosuunnitelma
Miten tutkimus on suunniteltu?
Suunnittelun yksityiskohdat
- Ensisijainen käyttötarkoitus: Muut
- Jako: Satunnaistettu
- Inventiomalli: Rinnakkaistehtävä
- Naamiointi: Yksittäinen
Aseet ja interventiot
Osallistujaryhmä / Arm |
Interventio / Hoito |
|---|---|
|
Kokeellinen: AI-Assisted Structured Guidance Group
Participants in this group will complete a narrative literature review according to the same course requirements as the control group.
They may use AI tools under academic integrity requirements and will additionally receive one structured guidance session approximately two weeks before final submission.
|
A single structured guidance session delivered approximately two weeks before final submission.
The session is based on the six SANRA dimensions and provides directional and methodological feedback on narrative review writing and appropriate AI use, without direct writing or line-by-line editing of students' text.
Participants may use AI tools freely under academic integrity requirements while completing the narrative literature review.
Students are responsible for verifying AI-generated content, medical facts, and reference authenticity.
|
|
Active Comparator: Free AI Use Group
Participants in this group will complete a narrative literature review according to the same course requirements and may use AI tools under academic integrity requirements.
They will not receive the structured guidance session during the study period.
|
Participants may use AI tools freely under academic integrity requirements while completing the narrative literature review.
Students are responsible for verifying AI-generated content, medical facts, and reference authenticity.
|
Mitä tutkimuksessa mitataan?
Ensisijaiset tulostoimenpiteet
Tulosmittaus |
Toimenpiteen kuvaus |
Aikaikkuna |
|---|---|---|
|
Final SANRA Total Score
Aikaikkuna: Week 2
|
The quality of the final narrative literature review will be assessed using the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA).
The SANRA total score ranges from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating better quality of the narrative review.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.
|
Week 2
|
Toissijaiset tulostoimenpiteet
Tulosmittaus |
Toimenpiteen kuvaus |
Aikaikkuna |
|---|---|---|
|
SANRA Item 1 Score: Importance of the Article
Aikaikkuna: Week 2
|
This outcome assesses SANRA item 1, which evaluates whether the importance of the narrative review article is adequately explained.
The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better reporting.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.
|
Week 2
|
|
SANRA Item 2 Score: Aims or Questions
Aikaikkuna: Week 2
|
This outcome assesses SANRA item 3, which evaluates whether the literature search process is described.
The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better reporting.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.
|
Week 2
|
|
SANRA Item 3 Score: Literature Search Description
Aikaikkuna: Week 2
|
This outcome assesses SANRA item 3, which evaluates whether the literature search process is described.
The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better reporting.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.
|
Week 2
|
|
SANRA Item 4 Score: Referencing
Aikaikkuna: Week 2
|
At final submission of the narrative literature review; assessment completed within 4 weeks after final submission.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.
|
Week 2
|
|
SANRA Item 5 Score: Scientific Reasoning
Aikaikkuna: Week 2
|
This outcome assesses SANRA item 5, which evaluates whether the scientific reasoning is based on appropriate evidence.
The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better scientific reasoning.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.
|
Week 2
|
|
SANRA Item 6 Score: Data and Content Presentation
Aikaikkuna: Week 2
|
This outcome assesses SANRA item 6, which evaluates whether data and content are presented appropriately.
The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better presentation.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.
|
Week 2
|
|
Change From Baseline in Multiple-Source Academic Writing Self-Efficacy Score
Aikaikkuna: Baseline and Week 2
|
Multiple-source academic writing self-efficacy will be assessed using an adapted 8-item Multiple-Source Academic Writing Self-Efficacy Scale.
The change from baseline to final submission will be analyzed.
Higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy in integrating multiple sources for academic writing.
|
Baseline and Week 2
|
|
Reference Authenticity Error Rate
Aikaikkuna: Week 2
|
The proportion of references with authenticity errors will be calculated for each submitted narrative literature review.
References will be verified using available bibliographic information such as DOI, PMID, title, authors, PubMed, CrossRef, Web of Science, Google Scholar, journal websites, or publisher websites.
A higher error rate indicates poorer reference authenticity.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.
|
Week 2
|
Yhteistyökumppanit ja tutkijat
Julkaisuja ja hyödyllisiä linkkejä
Opintojen ennätyspäivät
Opi tärkeimmät päivämäärät
Opiskelun aloitus (Arvioitu)
Ensisijainen valmistuminen (Arvioitu)
Opintojen valmistuminen (Arvioitu)
Opintoihin ilmoittautumispäivät
Ensimmäinen lähetetty
Ensimmäinen toimitettu, joka täytti QC-kriteerit
Ensimmäinen Lähetetty (Todellinen)
Tutkimustietojen päivitykset
Viimeisin päivitys julkaistu (Todellinen)
Viimeisin lähetetty päivitys, joka täytti QC-kriteerit
Viimeksi vahvistettu
Lisää tietoa
Tähän tutkimukseen liittyvät termit
Avainsanat
Muut tutkimustunnusnumerot
- IIT2026064
Yksittäisten osallistujien tietojen suunnitelma (IPD)
Aiotko jakaa yksittäisten osallistujien tietoja (IPD)?
IPD-suunnitelman kuvaus
Lääke- ja laitetiedot, tutkimusasiakirjat
Tutkii yhdysvaltalaista FDA sääntelemää lääkevalmistetta
Tutkii yhdysvaltalaista FDA sääntelemää laitetuotetta
Nämä tiedot haettiin suoraan verkkosivustolta clinicaltrials.gov ilman muutoksia. Jos sinulla on pyyntöjä muuttaa, poistaa tai päivittää tutkimustietojasi, ota yhteyttä register@clinicaltrials.gov. Heti kun muutos on otettu käyttöön osoitteessa clinicaltrials.gov, se päivitetään automaattisesti myös verkkosivustollemme .