ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2026
The Forgotten Student-Generative AI Use in Medical Education and the Technology-Integrated Educational Design (TIED) Road Map: Scoping Review.
Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The growing impact of generative AI (GenAI) on medical education has given rise to many reviews discussing AI literacy, trustworthiness, potential uses, and institutional or faculty benefits. However, there has been surprisingly little review-level attention to its impact on students and learning. Objective: This scoping review examines the impact of GenAI-enabled educational interventions on undergraduate medical students. Methods: We followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. An electronic search was conducted between September 22 and September 24, 2025, across Ovid (MEDLINE and Embase), PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, with no language or date restrictions, and excluding reviews, commentaries, letters, editorials, preprints, conference papers, and study protocols. Each record was independently screened by two reviewers, who thoroughly discussed and agreed upon its final inclusion in the analysis. We used a modified version of the Kirkpatrick model as an analytical framework for the final dataset. Results: Twenty-seven studies were included. Most were published in 2025 (n=21) and in the Conclusions: Our review highlights the volume of studies that prioritize tool performance over learning processes, as well as a trend toward the fragmentation of educational design elements in research evaluating GenAI-enabled educational interventions. Therefore, based on our findings, we developed the Technology-Integrated Educational Design (TIED) road map that reimagines the Kirkpatrick model as a tool to guide student-centered, theory-driven, and iterative design of technology-enabled educational interventions. By integrating preinstructional exploration, mechanism-oriented thinking, educational design, implementation, and evaluation within a single student-centered framework, the road map encourages educators and researchers to consider not only whether technology-enabled interventions work and are acceptable, but also how, for whom, and under what conditions they support meaningful learning.
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.