ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Application of an iterative generative AI-augmented teaching model in medical immunology education.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Teacher-regulated generative AI support, student agency, and perceived learning gains in higher education: the moderating role of perceived fairness.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Immunology education faces persistent challenges, including abstract concepts, theory-practice disconnect, and delayed feedback. Generative AI offers opportunities, yet its integration into pedagogical frameworks remains underexplored. Methods: We developed an Iterative AI-Augmented Immunology Education (IAIE) model integrating generative AI with the 4C/ID model and cognitive load theory. A 12-week quasi-experimental study enrolled 177 medical undergraduates (experimental: n = 88; control: n = 89), with outcomes assessed using the Host-Pathogen Interactions Concept Inventory (HPI-CI) and a modified Clinical Decision-Making in Nursing Scale (CDMNS). Results: The experimental group showed significantly greater knowledge mastery (82.7 vs. 70.1, Cohen's d =1.12) and clinical decision-making accuracy (+31.7%). Over 84% of students recognized AI's value in understanding complex mechanisms. Reflective practice scores indicated high levels of reflective ability, and DREEM assessments confirmed strong student acceptance of the learning environment. Discussion: The IAIE model effectively bridges theory and practice through AI-driven scaffolding that modulates cognitive load, fostering higher-order thinking and critical engagement with AI-generated content. This theory-informed framework offers a transferable approach for competency-based medical education.
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.