ArticleJournal of clinical nursing2026
Enhancing Learning in Graduate Nursing Education Through a Co-Designed AI Virtual Tutor: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation.
Article in Journal of clinical nursing, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLarge language model tools are increasingly used in higher education, offering opportunities to support self-directed learning. In nursing education, course-specific AI virtual tutors may provide contextualised support while addressing concerns about content accuracy and alignment; yet empirical evidence remains limited.
objectiveThis study evaluated the use and perceived impact of a co-designed AI-powered virtual tutor embedded in a graduate-level Master of Nursing (MN) course. We explored how students used the tutor, their perceptions of benefits and limitations, and its influence on learning and engagement.
methodsA pilot study using a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design was employed. The tutor was trained on course-specific materials and integrated into the institutional learning management system. Data included anonymised usage logs and user interactions coded using Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, post-course surveys assessing AI self-efficacy, usability, and learning impact, and semi-structured interviews with students and teaching assistants (TAs). Quantitative and qualitative strands were integrated through a joint display.
resultsA total of 651 interactions by individuals within a group of ~120 MN students were logged. Interactions peaked in evenings and around assignment deadlines. Most interactions reflected lower-order education processes, with more application and analysis later in the course. Eleven participants completed surveys; students reported high AI self-efficacy and moderate tutor use. Perceived usefulness was mixed, but most reported the tutor enhanced both lower- and higher-level learning and recommended its future use. Interviews revealed that students valued the tutor's immediacy and course-specific accuracy, while TAs noted efficiency gains. Reported challenges included usability issues, scope limitations, privacy concerns, and risk of over-reliance on the tool.
conclusionsA co-designed AI virtual tutor was feasible and valued for contextual relevance, though perceived usefulness was variable. Findings support responsible, pedagogically integrated use of AI tutors in graduate nursing 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.