ArticleBMC nursing2025
Effects of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) patient simulation on perceived clinical competency among global nursing undergraduates: a cross-over randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMC nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- AI-Powered Simulation for Nursing Education: Mixed Methods Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- The impact of generative artificial intelligence on clinical skills and knowledge acquisition in medical undergraduates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- The Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence in Undergraduate Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.JMIR medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence in Nursing Practice Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of nursing management · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Outcomes, Evaluation Metrics, and Measurement Tools for Large Language Model Applications Research in Nursing: A Scoping Review.International nursing review · 2026Article
- AI Use, Perceptions, and Perceived Impact Among Nursing Students: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR nursing · 2026Article
- Nursing undergraduates' experiences of generative AI-assisted learning in the classroom environment: a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Exploring a Metacognitive Scaffolding-Based GenAI-Assisted Peer Feedback Provision Approach to Enhance Feedback Engagement Among Nursing Students.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- Medical students perceptions and attitudes toward the use of generative artificial intelligence in clinical decision-making: a nationwide cross-sectional survey in China.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Multimodal generative AI for pre-practicum mental health support competency development: a human-supervised framework for education-childcare partnerships.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Effects of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Education on Critical Thinking, Problem-Solving, Clinical Reasoning, and Decision-Making in Health Science Education: A Systematic Review of Interventional Studies.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Review
- From Competence to Character: Reimagining Neurology Education for a Complex and Changing World.Neurology. Education · 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study compared scenario-based generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) patient simulation with immersive 360° virtual reality (VR) simulation in terms of perceived clinical competence, cultural awareness, AI readiness, and simulation effectiveness among nursing students.
methodsThis cross-over randomised controlled study design was conducted from June 2024 to August 2024. Forty-four undergraduate nursing students from years 1-3 were randomised to receive either GenAI patient simulation (Group B) or 360° VR simulation (Group A) with a one-week washout period. Five self-reported questionnaires were used to measure clinical competency: the Clinical Competence Questionnaire (CCQ), Cultural Awareness Scale (CAS), Medical Artificial Intelligence Readiness Scale for Medical Students (MAIRS-MS), Simulation Effectiveness Tool - Modified Questionnaire (SET-M), and a demographic questionnaire.
resultsBoth interventions significantly improved clinical competence, cultural awareness, and AI readiness. When administered first, GenAI patient simulation demonstrated greater initial effects on clinical competence and AI readiness compared to the 360° VR simulation, though both groups achieved similar improvements by study completion. At T1, Group B (receiving GenAI) demonstrated significantly larger improvements in CCQ total score [47.68 (95% CI: 36.68, 58.68), p < 0.001] compared to Group A (receiving 360° VR) [24.95 (95% CI: 13.96, 35.95), p < 0.001], with significant between-group difference [16.59 (95% CI: 2.77, 30.41), p = 0.020]. At T2 (post-crossover), both groups maintained significant improvements. For MAIRS-MS (measured at baseline and following each group's GenAI exposure), Group B showed improvement from baseline to T1 [30.18 (95% CI: 23.35, 37.01), p < 0.001] while Group A showed improvement from baseline to T2 [16.64 (95% CI: 9.80, 23.47), p < 0.001], with significant between-group difference [12.09 (95% CI: 4.43, 19.75), p = 0.003]. Both groups experienced changes in CAS scores, though between-group differences were not statistically significant. For SET-M, most participants (75%) felt debriefing contributed to their learning, and 68.2% reported increased confidence in nursing assessment skills.
conclusionsThe findings provide preliminary evidence of its effectiveness in enhancing perceived clinical outcomes among nursing students. Both 360° VR simulation and GenAI patient simulation may serve as effective teaching tools; however, GenAI patient simulation appeared to demonstrate a greater initial effect on clinical competence and AI readiness, although both interventions proved effective across all measured domains. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION/NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.