Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42200657›Full record

ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2026

Teaching bioinformatics with generative AI: judgment, uncertainty, and responsibility.

Ashley I Teufel, David A Liberles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of microbiology & biology 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ashley I TeufelDepartment of Natural Sciences, Texas A&M University - San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3613-9517
David A LiberlesDepartment of Biology and Institute for Genomics and Evolutionary Medicine, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools are rapidly reshaping how students write code, analyze data, and articulate scientific reasoning. In bioinformatics education, where computational workflows intersect with biological interpretation, these tools present both substantial opportunities and serious pedagogical risks. Rather than attempting to prohibit or police AI use, which is increasingly impractical, instructors must reconsider what it means to teach bioinformatics when routine coding, data wrangling, and even statistical analysis can be automated. This is not a temporary disruption; students will build careers in an automated world. A central challenge is the relationship between expertise and effective AI use. Generative AI is most productive in the hands of users who can evaluate its outputs, yet students are precisely the population still developing that capacity. This perspective reflects on teaching undergraduate and graduate bioinformatics courses during the early generative AI era, focusing on how AI tools alter student behavior, assessment design, and instructor responsibilities. When integrated deliberately into pedagogy, AI can lower technical barriers and accelerate learning. When students engage with AI without adequate scaffolding, it risks masking misunderstandings and short-circuiting the development of foundational skills.

Indexed as

AIbioinformaticscomputational biologyteaching

Identifiers

PMID42200657
PMCPMC13520716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.