ArticleCureus2026
Designing Self-Directed Learning Content for Medical Students: An AI-Driven Evaluation of Learning Outcomes.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe National Medical Commission of India requires self-directed learning (SDL) in the MBBS curriculum. SDL is a fundamental component of competency-based medical education (CBME). Although generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies such as ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA) and Gemini (Google, Mountain View, CA) have expanded options for improving SDL, concerns about accuracy, academic integrity, and overreliance persist. This study assessed the quality, effectiveness, and learning outcomes of undergraduate medical students in relation to an organized AI-assisted SDL process. MATERIAL AND
methodsEighty-three second-year MBBS students from the Department of Microbiology at the Autonomous State Medical College in Kanpur Dehat participated in a single-center pre-post interventional trial using a within-subject crossover design. After structured instruction in prompt engineering, AI verification techniques, and a human-in-the-loop workflow, participants completed a standard SDL assignment, followed by an AI-assisted SDL assignment. A validated 10-domain rubric (maximum score: 20) covering accuracy, relevance, completeness, organization, clarity, clinical examples, visuals, critical thinking, appropriateness, and originality was used to evaluate assignment quality. Pre- and post-tests measured knowledge acquisition, and student opinions and task completion times were also recorded. Statistical analyses included Cohen's d effect sizes, paired t-tests, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for inter-rater reliability.
resultIn every rubric domain, AI-assisted SDL performed significantly better than traditional SDL (p < 0.001). Mean rubric scores improved by 29.1%, from 57.1% to 86.2% (Cohen's d = 2.8). Organization (+71.3%), completeness (+63.5%), and clarity (+62.5%) showed the largest gains. Knowledge scores increased from 5.2 to 8.8 out of 10 (p < 0.001; d = 2.5). Average task completion time decreased by 43%, from 44.5 to 25.4 minutes (p < 0.001; d = 1.5). Inter-rater reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.94). Most students reported feeling more confident (n = 65, 78%), synthesizing information more quickly (n = 76, 92%), and routinely using textbooks to verify AI-generated content (n = 71, 85%). The most commonly reported challenges were concerns about accuracy and timely formulation.
conclusionThe systematic integration of generative AI into SDL significantly enhances MBBS students' learning efficiency, knowledge acquisition, and content quality. While highlighting the importance of maintaining human oversight to ensure accurate and responsible use of AI in medical education, our findings support integrating AI literacy and verification competencies into the medical curriculum.
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.