AI-Assisted Structured Guidance for Narrative Review Writing
Effect of Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Structured Guidance on the Quality of Narrative Literature Reviews Among Medical Postgraduate Students: A Randomized Controlled Educational Study
1 other identifier
interventional
102
1 country
1
Brief Summary
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.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started Jun 2026
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
May 25, 2026
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
June 1, 2026
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
June 1, 2026
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
August 1, 2026
ExpectedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
September 1, 2026
June 1, 2026
May 1, 2026
2 months
May 25, 2026
May 25, 2026
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Final SANRA Total Score
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.
Week 2
Secondary Outcomes (8)
SANRA Item 1 Score: Importance of the Article
Week 2
SANRA Item 2 Score: Aims or Questions
Week 2
SANRA Item 3 Score: Literature Search Description
Week 2
SANRA Item 4 Score: Referencing
Week 2
SANRA Item 5 Score: Scientific Reasoning
Week 2
- +3 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
AI-Assisted Structured Guidance Group
EXPERIMENTALParticipants in this group will complete a narrative literature review according to the same course requirements as the control group. They may use AI tools under academic integrity requirements and will additionally receive one structured guidance session approximately two weeks before final submission.
Free AI Use Group
ACTIVE COMPARATORParticipants in this group will complete a narrative literature review according to the same course requirements and may use AI tools under academic integrity requirements. They will not receive the structured guidance session during the study period.
Interventions
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.
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.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- 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.
You may not qualify if:
- 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.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University
Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510060, China
Related Publications (1)
Baethge C, Goldbeck-Wood S, Mertens S. SANRA-a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019 Mar 26;4:5. doi: 10.1186/s41073-019-0064-8. eCollection 2019.
PMID: 30962953RESULT
Central Study Contacts
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Masking Details
- Outcome assessors will be blinded to group allocation. Final narrative literature reviews will be anonymized before assessment, with names, student identifiers, group assignment, guidance records, and AI use declarations removed. Independent assessors will evaluate the anonymized reviews using the SANRA scale.
- Purpose
- OTHER
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
May 25, 2026
First Posted
June 1, 2026
Study Start
June 1, 2026
Primary Completion (Estimated)
August 1, 2026
Study Completion (Estimated)
September 1, 2026
Last Updated
June 1, 2026
Record last verified: 2026-05
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share
Individual participant data will not be shared because the study involves students' coursework, questionnaires, AI use declarations, and writing-related educational data. These data may contain potentially identifiable information even after de-identification. Only aggregated results will be reported in publications or academic presentations.