ArticleBMC medical education2026
AI-assisted academic writing in medical postgraduate education: a cross-sectional study of L2 challenges, affective barriers, and instructional implications.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Second language (L2) academic writing has become increasingly critical for postgraduate students in non-English speaking contexts, particularly in specialized disciplines such as medicine. However, medical postgraduates often struggle with linguistic challenges, emotional barriers, and limited instructional support. With the rise of AI-based writing tools such as ChatGPT and Grammarly, new opportunities have emerged for supporting these learners—but concerns remain regarding cognitive dependence, ethical boundaries, and pedagogical integration. This study investigates the L2 academic writing experiences of 304 medical postgraduates in China, focusing on writing difficulties, emotional responses, feedback from supervisors, and the use of AI-assisted tools. Using a cross-sectional survey design, we analyzed students’ self-reported abilities, affective states, and writing behaviors. Results revealed that while most students had prior experience in English writing, they reported persistent challenges with discourse organization, tone control, and academic style. Writing anxiety, procrastination, and lack of emotional regulation were common. Supervisor feedback was seen as valuable but inconsistently delivered. AI tools such as ChatGPT and Grammarly were widely used for grammar correction and polishing, and generally perceived as helpful, though concerns about over-reliance emerged.Findings highlight the need for a comprehensive pedagogical framework that integrates L2 writing instruction, affective support, and ethical use of AI to empower domain-specific postgraduate learners.
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.