Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not Yet Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07618819

AI-Assisted Structured Guidance for Narrative Review Writing

This randomized, parallel-group, assessor-blinded educational study will evaluate whether one session of AI-assisted structured guidance improves the quality of narrative literature reviews written by medical postgraduate students. A total of 102 students enrolled in an academic writing course will be randomly assigned to either an AI-assisted structured guidance group or a free AI use group. Both groups may use AI tools under academic integrity requirements and will complete a narrative literature review according to the same course requirements. The guidance group will receive one structured guidance session approximately two weeks before final submission. The session will be based on the six dimensions of the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA). The primary outcome is the final SANRA total score of the submitted narrative literature review.

Not Yet Recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Conditions

AI-Assisted Academic Writing Medical Education Narrative Review Writing

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University

Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510060, China

About this study

Generative artificial intelligence is increasingly used by medical students and postgraduate trainees for literature searching, summarization, outlining, and academic writing. However, free use of AI may be associated with inaccurate information, unsupported statements, fabricated references, and inadequate academic judgment. This study is designed to evaluate whether structured guidance can improve the quality and academic integrity of AI-assisted narrative review writing.

Participants will be medical postgraduate students enrolled in an academic writing course. After informed consent and baseline data collection, participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to an AI-assisted structured guidance group or a free AI use group. Both groups will complete a narrative literature review of approximately 2,000 Chinese characters according to the same course requirements and may use AI tools under academic integrity requirements.

Participants in the AI-assisted structured guidance group will receive one structured guidance session approximately two weeks before final submission. The session will be based on the six SANRA dimensions: explanation of the importance of the article, statement of aims or questions, description of the literature search, reference support for key statements, scientific reasoning, and appropriate presentation of data and content. The instructor will provide directional and methodological feedback but will not directly write or edit the students' text line by line. Participants in the free AI use group will complete the review according to the same course requirements without the structured guidance session.

After submission, all narrative reviews will be anonymized and assessed by independent outcome assessors blinded to group allocation. The primary outcome is the final SANRA total score. Secondary outcomes include SANRA item scores, multiple-source academic writing self-efficacy, and reference authenticity error rate.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Master's students enrolled in the Academic Standards and Thesis Writing course.
  • Willing to participate in this study, able to understand the study procedures and randomization arrangement, and able to provide written informed consent.
  • Able to complete literature searching, use AI tools, and complete online questionnaires.

Exclusion criteria

  • Students who have confirmed withdrawal from the course, suspension of study, long-term leave, or other known objective reasons that prevent participation in subsequent major teaching activities and study procedures.
  • Students who have participated in pilot testing, intervention material development, assessment training, or data processing related to this study.

Treatment and study plan

AI-Assisted Structured Guidance

Behavioral

A single structured guidance session delivered approximately two weeks before final submission. The session is based on the six SANRA dimensions and provides directional and methodological feedback on narrative review writing and appropriate AI use, without direct writing or line-by-line editing of students' text.

Free AI Use

Behavioral

Participants may use AI tools freely under academic integrity requirements while completing the narrative literature review. Students are responsible for verifying AI-generated content, medical facts, and reference authenticity.

Primary outcomes

  1. Final SANRA Total Score

    Time frame: Week 2

    The quality of the final narrative literature review will be assessed using the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA). The SANRA total score ranges from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating better quality of the narrative review.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.

Secondary outcomes

  1. SANRA Item 1 Score: Importance of the Article

    Time frame: Week 2

    This outcome assesses SANRA item 1, which evaluates whether the importance of the narrative review article is adequately explained. The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better reporting.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.

  2. SANRA Item 2 Score: Aims or Questions

    Time frame: Week 2

    This outcome assesses SANRA item 3, which evaluates whether the literature search process is described. The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better reporting.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.

  3. SANRA Item 3 Score: Literature Search Description

    Time frame: Week 2

    This outcome assesses SANRA item 3, which evaluates whether the literature search process is described. The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better reporting.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.

  4. SANRA Item 4 Score: Referencing

    Time frame: Week 2

    At final submission of the narrative literature review; assessment completed within 4 weeks after final submission.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.

  5. SANRA Item 5 Score: Scientific Reasoning

    Time frame: Week 2

    This outcome assesses SANRA item 5, which evaluates whether the scientific reasoning is based on appropriate evidence. The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better scientific reasoning.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.

  6. SANRA Item 6 Score: Data and Content Presentation

    Time frame: Week 2

    This outcome assesses SANRA item 6, which evaluates whether data and content are presented appropriately. The item score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher scores indicating better presentation.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.

  7. Change From Baseline in Multiple-Source Academic Writing Self-Efficacy Score

    Time frame: Baseline and Week 2

    Multiple-source academic writing self-efficacy will be assessed using an adapted 8-item Multiple-Source Academic Writing Self-Efficacy Scale. The change from baseline to final submission will be analyzed. Higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy in integrating multiple sources for academic writing.

  8. Reference Authenticity Error Rate

    Time frame: Week 2

    The proportion of references with authenticity errors will be calculated for each submitted narrative literature review. References will be verified using available bibliographic information such as DOI, PMID, title, authors, PubMed, CrossRef, Web of Science, Google Scholar, journal websites, or publisher websites. A higher error rate indicates poorer reference authenticity.The outcome will be assessed based on the narrative literature review submitted at Week 2.

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Guangming Jin

CONTACT

[email protected]

+86-13560035613

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Effect of Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Structured Guidance on the Quality of Narrative Literature Reviews Among Medical Postgraduate Students: A Randomized Controlled Educational Study

Important dates

Study start
2026
Primary completion
2026
Study completion
2026
First posted
Jun 1, 2026
Registry last updated
Jun 1, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.