ArticleBDJ open2025
Transforming education: tackling the two sigma problem with AI in journal clubs - a proof of concept.
Article in BDJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring an LLM's Use in Supporting Journal Club Preparation and Discussion Among Residents.Journal of dental education · 2026Article
- Complementary AI in higher education: behavioral, cognitive, and ethical implications of ChatGPT and DeepSeek.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A generative AI teaching assistant for personalized learning in medical education.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Assessing the power of AI: a comparative evaluation of large language models in generating patient education materials in dentistry.BDJ open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionJournal clubs are integral to continuing medical education, promoting critical thinking and evidence-based learning. However, inconsistent engagement, reliance on faculty expertise, and the complexity of research articles can limit their effectiveness. Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI), particularly Large Language Models (LLMs) offers a potential solution, but general-purpose LLMs may generate inaccurate responses ("hallucinations"). Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) mitigates this by integrating AI-generated content with curated knowledge sources, ensuring more accurate and contextually relevant responses. This study explores the development and preliminary evaluation of a RAG-enhanced LLM to support journal club discussions. MATERIALS AND
methodsA specialized LLM was deployed using Microsoft Azure's GPT-4o. A vector database was created by embedding journal club articles using text-embedding-ada-002 (Version 2) for efficient information retrieval. A dedicated website provided user-friendly access. The study followed a design-based research (DBR) approach, engaging residents and faculty who interacted with the LLM before and during journal club sessions. Data collection included focus group discussions (FGDs) and questionnaires assessing engagement, usability, and impact.
resultsThe study involved a total of 13 residents and three faculty members as participants. 50% of residents reported a positive experience, while the rest had a neutral response, citing both advantages and limitations. The LLM improved article summarization, query responses, and engagement as reported by residents. Moreover, the faculty observed enhanced discussion quality and preparation whereas overall challenges included the need for precise prompts and occasional misleading responses.
conclusionThe study highlights the potential of a RAG-enhanced LLM to improve journal club engagement and learning. Future advancements in AI and open-source models may enhance accessibility, warranting further research.
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.