ReviewBritish journal of biomedical science2024
Generative AI in Higher Education: Balancing Innovation and Integrity.
Review in British journal of biomedical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evaluating AI-powered instruction on Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA) teaching outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Reimagining writing assessment for the AI era: a systematic review on balancing AI support and authentic skill growth.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Quality assurance in generative AI-mediated education: a bibliometric and scoping review.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Pooled it
- The impact of generative AI on health professional education: A systematic review in the context of student learning.Medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence is here to stay: shaping the future of scientific publishing.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Navigating GenAI in assessment design with supercharging and proofing.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2026Article
- Beyond Ease of Use: Dynamics of Technology Adoption and Cognitive Load in AI-Assisted Programming for Non-Technical Students.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The role of digital teaching methods in supporting practical skills training in the academic training of health professions - a scoping review.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Supporting quantitative skills in biomedical science with smart worksheets: intentions, impact and barriers to engagement.British journal of biomedical science · 2026Article
- Transforming surgical ward rounds: constructivist pedagogy, structured models, and intelligent technologies.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- The cognitive mechanism: safeguarding the future of immunological discovery in the GenAI era.Discovery immunology · 2026Article
- The association between AI dependence, AI literacy, and critical thinking ability among nursing interns: a multicenter cross-sectional study.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- The impact of GenAI on applicant behaviour, performance, and interview reliability during virtual interviews for medical school admissions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- How our advisory board members are using generative AI in teaching.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Graduate Medical Education.Annals of family medicine · 2025Article
- Development of the generative artificial intelligence awareness scale for secondary school students in Türkiye.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- The role of generative AI tools in case-based learning and teaching evaluation of medical biochemistry.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Exploring faculty perceptions and concerns regarding artificial intelligence Chatbots in nursing education: potential benefits and limitations.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Academic writing and critical appraisal in physiology education: discerning the benefits of using large language models as knowledge receivers or knowledge providers.Current research in physiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is rapidly transforming the landscape of higher education, offering novel opportunities for personalised learning and innovative assessment methods. This paper explores the dual-edged nature of GenAI's integration into educational practices, focusing on both its potential to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes and the significant challenges it poses to academic integrity and equity. Through a comprehensive review of current literature, we examine the implications of GenAI on assessment practices, highlighting the need for robust ethical frameworks to guide its use. Our analysis is framed within pedagogical theories, including social constructivism and competency-based learning, highlighting the importance of balancing human expertise and AI capabilities. We also address broader ethical concerns associated with GenAI, such as the risks of bias, the digital divide, and the environmental impact of AI technologies. This paper argues that while GenAI can provide substantial benefits in terms of automation and efficiency, its integration must be managed with care to avoid undermining the authenticity of student work and exacerbating existing inequalities. Finally, we propose a set of recommendations for educational institutions, including developing GenAI literacy programmes, revising assessment designs to incorporate critical thinking and creativity, and establishing transparent policies that ensure fairness and accountability in GenAI use. By fostering a responsible approach to GenAI, higher education can harness its potential while safeguarding the core values of academic integrity and inclusive education.
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.