ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
A ChatGPT Assisted Reading Protocol for Undergraduate Research Students.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A major challenge for undergraduate students is reading scientific literature. This is especially true in biophysics, where many of the concepts may not have been covered in undergraduate courses. Students can become overwhelmed, which may lead to less overall engagement with the scientific literature. In response, we have developed a guided reading protocol that combines pre-reading strategies, structured notetaking, and ChatGPT to help students clarify unfamiliar concepts in an interactive way. To test the protocol, participants in this study were given an initial survey to determine their experience with reading scientific literature. After this they were given an abridged biophysics paper and the protocol. The ChatGPT transcripts were analyzed using open coding and the students were given a post-study survey. We found most students did not appear to regularly engage with the literature, possibly due to content barriers they encountered. Analyzing their transcripts, we observed that students asked for definitions, explanations, summaries, and simplifications. Overall, students reported that using ChatGPT was a positive experience and they expected to use ChatGPT in the future. From this work, we expect this new protocol may be a way to keep novice students from becoming discouraged when reading scientific papers and keep them engaged with the current literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.