Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39505810›Full record

ArticleAcademic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry2025

Artificial Intelligence-Generated Writing in the ERAS Personal Statement: An Emerging Quandary for Post-graduate Medical Education.

Hugh Burke, Rebecca Kazinka, Raghu Gandhi, Aimee Murray

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Comment on "Artificial Intelligence-Generated Writing in the ERAS Personal Statement: An Emerging Quandary for Post-Graduate Medical Education".Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Hugh BurkeMedical School, University of Minnesota (Twin Cities), Minneapolis, MN, USA. burke707@umn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0289-3757
Rebecca KazinkaMedical School, University of Minnesota (Twin Cities), Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Raghu GandhiAbbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Aimee MurrayMedical School, University of Minnesota (Twin Cities), Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study was designed to investigate if artificial intelligence (AI) detection software can determine the use of AI in personal statements for residency applications.

methodPreviously written personal statements were collected from physicians who had already matched to residency through the Electronic Residency Application System. Physicians were recruited for the study through collegial relationships and were given study information via email. The study team constructed five parallel statements from the shared personal statements to prompt AI to create a personal statement of similar content. An online AI detection tool, GPTZero, was used to assess all the personal statements. Statistical analyses were conducted using R. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and Pearson correlations were used to assess the data.

resultsEight physicians' statements were compared to eight AI-generated statements. GPTZero was able to correctly identify AI-generated writing, assigning them significantly higher AI probability scores compared to human-authored essays. Human-generated statements were considered more readable, used shorter words with fewer syllables, and had more sentences compared to AI-generated essays. Longer average sentence length, low readability scores, and high SAT word percentages were strongly associated with AI-generated essays.

conclusionsThis study shows the capacity of GPTZero to distinguish human-created versus AI-generated writing. Use of AI can pose significant ethical challenges and carries a risk of inadvertent harm to certain applicants and erosion of trust in the application process. Authors suggest standardization of protocol regarding the use of AI prior to its integration in post-graduate medical education.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceEducation, Medical, GraduateInternship and ResidencyWritingHumansAIPersonal statementResidency

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.