ArticleCanadian medical education journal2025
Investigating the threat of AI to undergraduate medical school admissions: a study of its potential impact on the rating of applicant essays.
Article in Canadian medical education journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimating the Prevalence of Generative AI Use in Medical School Application Essays: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- AI in health professions education.Canadian medical education journal · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Medical school applications often require short written essays or personal statements, which are purportedly used to assess professional qualities related to the practice of medicine. With generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools capable of supplementing or replacing inputs by human applicants, concerns about how these tools impact written assessments are growing. This study explores how AI influences the ratings of essays used for medical school admissions. Methods: A within-subject experimental design was employed. Eight participants (academic clinicians, faculty researchers, medical students, and a community member) rated essays written by 24 undergraduate students and recent graduates from McMaster University. The students were divided into four groups: medical school aspirants with AI assistance (ASP-AI), aspirants without AI assistance (ASP), non-aspirants with AI assistance (NASP-AI), and essays generated solely by ChatGPT 3.5 (AI-ONLY). Participants were provided training in the application of single Likert scale tool before rating. Differences in ratings by writer group were determined via one-way between group ANOVA. Results: Analyses revealed no statistically significant differences in ratings across the four writer groups ( Conclusion: The proliferation of AI adds to prevailing questions about the value personal statements and essays have in supporting applicant selection. We speculate that these assessments hold less value than ever in providing authentic insight into applicant attributes. In this context, we suggest that medical schools move away from the use of essays in their admissions processes.
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.