Search Articles

View query in Help articles search

Search Results (1 to 10 of 1530 Results)

Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS


Feasibility and Usability of a Web-Based Peer Support Network for Care Partners of People With Serious Illness (ConnectShareCare): Observational Study

Feasibility and Usability of a Web-Based Peer Support Network for Care Partners of People With Serious Illness (ConnectShareCare): Observational Study

Number of (A) member posts, (B) moderator posts, and (C) total number of individuals (members and moderators) posting each month on the Connect Share Care network (c Chart Statistical Process Control analysis). The mean is represented by the turquoise (solid) line. The UCLs and LCLs are represented by the red dash lines. CL: confidence limit; LCL: lower confidence limit; UCL: upper confidence limit. Care partner experience was assessed via an anonymous survey.

Aricca D Van Citters, Megan M Holthoff, Colleen Young, Sarah M Eck, Amelia M Cullinan, Stephanie Carney, Elizabeth A O'Donnell, Joel R King, Malavika Govindan, David Gustafson, Stephanie C Tomlin, Anne B Holmes, Ann D Bradley, Brant J Oliver, Matthew M Wilson, Eugene C Nelson, Amber E Barnato, Kathryn B Kirkland

JMIR Form Res 2025;9:e70206

Chatbots’ Role in Generating Single Best Answer Questions for Undergraduate Medical Student Assessment: Comparative Analysis

Chatbots’ Role in Generating Single Best Answer Questions for Undergraduate Medical Student Assessment: Comparative Analysis

Gemini consistently demonstrated a preference for the correct answer to be listed as option B. The Chat GPT-3.5 and Chat GPT-4 appeared to favor options A, B, and C. Bing appeared to favor options A and E. Regarding the technical item flaws among the outputs, the chatbots performed similarly in terms of following an SBA format (Figure 2 A) and achieving the “cover test” satisfaction (Figure 2 B), although Chat GPT-4 scored slightly lower on satisfying the cover test.

Enjy Abouzeid, Rita Wassef, Ayesha Jawwad, Patricia Harris

JMIR Med Educ 2025;11:e69521