Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42466880›Full record

ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2026

Truth, tone, and trust: integrating an AI exercise to foster responsible science communication in a graduate biomedical science course.

Ilinca I Ciubotariu, Gundula Bosch

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.

Ilinca I CiubotariuR3 Center for Innovation in Science Education, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6549-0771
Gundula BoschR3 Center for Innovation in Science Education, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As generative AI becomes a standard fixture in graduate education, the pedagogical challenge has shifted from detection to integration. This article describes a curriculum intervention developed for Anatomy of Scientific Error, a graduate-level course on scientific error analysis in interdisciplinary research practice and communication at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. To inform the curriculum design, we first administered a needs-assessment survey to the cohort. Results revealed a critical trust gap: while students utilized generative artificial intelligence extensively for efficiency, they expressed anxiety regarding hallucinations and a lack of verification skills. While the course integrated multiple AI-related tasks, this paper focuses on a specific assignment titled "Truth, Tone, and Trust." Situated in the sixth week of the curriculum, this assignment represented a deliberate design pivot away from standard text-based prompts toward a multimodal, high-engagement activity. Students were tasked with improving three flawed, AI-generated variations of a recent real-world press release regarding the R21 malaria vaccine, using track changes to correct errors, and recording a video defense of their editorial decisions. This approach shifts the focus from regulating AI to stewarding knowledge, ensuring that efficiency does not come at the cost of critical thinking.

Indexed as

biomedical sciencesgenerative artificial intelligencehigher educationpublic healthrigorscience communicationSTEM

Identifiers

PMID42466880
PMCPMC13520686

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.