ArticleCureus2025
Can Residency Programs Detect Artificial Intelligence Use in Personal Statements?
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Detection Software for Residency Personal Statements.Journal of graduate medical education · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
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
objectiveTo evaluate widely used artificial intelligence (AI) detectors' ability to identify ChatGPT's (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA, USA) use in personal statements submitted as part of the residency program application. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis qualitative analysis was performed to evaluate the ability of three different AI detectors to detect the use of AI in personal statements submitted as part of residency applications for obstetrics and gynecology. A total of 25 writings were selected and analyzed by GPTZero (Princeton, NJ, USA), Undetectable AI (Sheridan, WY, USA), and Winston AI (Montreal, Quebec, Canada).
resultsIn total, 25 separate writing samples of approximately 700 words were entered into three different AI detectors. AI-generated works had high rates of AI-detection, while classic literature samples had low rates of detection. Human-written personal statements before and after the availability of ChatGPT technology results were mixed, with results ranging from 64-100% and 3-100% of content appearing to be AI, respectively. DISCUSSION: AI-chatbots have been shown to produce writing that may be indistinguishable from human work and may already be commonly used to create personal statements. It is unclear who is utilizing ChatGPT in their writing, and residency programs everywhere will seek a reliable way to detect unethical usage. This study shows that available AI detectors may be able to detect AI use in applicants' personal statements, but the use of invalidated tools may harm honest applicants.
conclusionResidency programs may be able to detect AI use in personal statements by utilizing AI-detection tools. Clear guidelines regarding the appropriate use of AI and authorship must be developed in order to maintain the integrity of student submissions.
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.