ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Using a Hybrid of AI and Template-Based Method in Automatic Item Generation to Create Multiple-Choice Questions in Medical Education: Hybrid AIG.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A scoping review of the use of generative artificial intelligence tools in health profession education.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- A research roadmap for AI opportunities in student assessment for medical education.BMC medical education · 2025Review
- Automatic- and Transformer-Based Automatic Item Generation: A Critical Review.Journal of Intelligence · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Template-based automatic item generation (AIG) is more efficient than traditional item writing but it still heavily relies on expert effort in model development. While nontemplate-based AIG, leveraging artificial intelligence (AI), offers efficiency, it faces accuracy challenges. Medical education, a field that relies heavily on both formative and summative assessments with multiple choice questions, is in dire need of AI-based support for the efficient automatic generation of items. Objective: We aimed to propose a hybrid AIG to demonstrate whether it is possible to generate item templates using AI in the field of medical education. Methods: This is a mixed-methods methodological study with proof-of-concept elements. We propose the hybrid AIG method as a structured series of interactions between a human subject matter expert and AI, designed as a collaborative authoring effort. The method leverages AI to generate item models (templates) and cognitive models to combine the advantages of the two AIG approaches. To demonstrate how to create item models using hybrid AIG, we used 2 medical multiple-choice questions: one on respiratory infections in adults and another on acute allergic reactions in the pediatric population. Results: The hybrid AIG method we propose consists of 7 steps. The first 5 steps are performed by an expert in a customized AI environment. These involve providing a parent item, identifying elements for manipulation, selecting options and assigning values to elements, and generating the cognitive model. After a final expert review (Step 6), the content in the template can be used for item generation through a traditional (non-AI) software (Step 7). We showed that AI is capable of generating item templates for AIG under the control of a human expert in only 10 minutes. Leveraging AI in template development made it less challenging. Conclusions: The hybrid AIG method transcends the traditional template-based approach by marrying the "art" that comes from AI as a "black box" with the "science" of algorithmic generation under the oversight of expert as a "marriage registrar". It does not only capitalize on the strengths of both approaches but also mitigates their weaknesses, offering a human-AI collaboration to increase efficiency in medical 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.