The exact text we saved

This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2733
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-12T17:16:24.492402Z
status: published
lens: g_space
sector: education
headline: Applications of Generative Artificial Intelligence Teaching in Nursing Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
dek: BACKGROUND: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly used in nursing education. Its educational effects in nursing remain uncertain. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of using GenAI in teaching nursing. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to July 2026. Standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were pooled using random-effects models. Heterogeneity, sensitivity analyses, meta-regression, and small-study effects w…
gain_title: A meta-analysis of 17 randomized trials with 1,456 nursing students found generative AI-integrated teaching was linked to higher knowledge scores (SMD 0.53), practice-related scores (SMD 1.25) and teaching satisfaction (SMD 0.58).
problem_title: (none)
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: A meta-analysis of 17 randomized trials with 1,456 nursing students found generative AI-integrated teaching was linked to higher knowledge scores (SMD 0.53), practice-related scores (SMD 1.25) and teaching satisfaction (SMD 0.58).
gain_evidence: GenAI-integrated teaching was associated with higher knowledge scores (standardized mean differences 0.53, 95% CI 0.03-1.04) | practice-related scores (SMD 1.25, 95% CI 0.23-2.28)
problem_reading: (none)
problem_evidence: (none)
quick_read: A systematic review and meta-analysis in Nurse Educator pooled 17 randomized controlled trials with 1,456 participants to test whether teaching nursing with generative AI changes learning outcomes. Teaching that integrated generative AI was associated with higher knowledge scores (standardized mean difference 0.53), practice-related scores (1.25) and teaching satisfaction (0.58).

Attitudes, competency and self-efficacy did not differ significantly between AI-integrated and comparison teaching. The authors say the findings point to possible benefits for knowledge, practice performance and satisfaction in nursing education.

The authors caution that extreme heterogeneity and sensitivity to individual studies limit confidence in how large and how reproducible the effects are. They recommend generative AI be used as a supervised teaching adjunct until higher-quality trials are available.
limitation: The authors report extreme heterogeneity across trials and sensitivity to individual studies, which limit confidence in the magnitude and reproducibility of the effects; meta-regression findings were exploratory.
tag: Evidence-backed gain
key_points: The review searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to July 2026. | Seventeen studies with 1,456 participants were included, and effects were pooled with random-effects models. | Knowledge scores were higher with generative AI teaching (SMD 0.53, 95% CI 0.03-1.04). | Practice-related scores showed the largest effect (SMD 1.25, 95% CI 0.23-2.28). | Teaching satisfaction was higher (SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.02-1.13). | Attitudes, competency and self-efficacy did not differ significantly. | Several confidence intervals come close to zero, and meta-regression findings were exploratory.
rundown: The analysis pooled standardized mean differences from randomized trials of generative AI in nursing teaching, using random-effects models. The authors also ran heterogeneity tests, sensitivity analyses, meta-regression and checks for small-study effects.

Three outcomes favored AI-integrated teaching: knowledge (SMD 0.53), practice-related performance (SMD 1.25) and satisfaction (SMD 0.58). The lower ends of all three confidence intervals sit near zero, so the true effects could be small.

No significant differences emerged for attitudes, competency or self-efficacy. The authors conclude that generative AI should serve as a supervised pedagogical adjunct pending high-quality trials.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | Nurse Educator | https://doi.org/10.1097/nne.0000000000002355 | 2026-10-23
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

SHA-256 hash

a51bac7ec349f80eafc4ed3a39dd2436626b9e865c9c20bb8b9719c334252391

Previous version’s hash

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000