Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This repository contains the raw search exports, retrieval identifiers, execution metadata and audit table for the 16 effects that contribute to the primary meta analysis. These results are associated with the scoping review and meta-analysis, “Generative AI-powered simulated patients in medical and healthcare education: A scoping review and meta-analysis.” The deposited materials include source-level search results retrieved from PubMed, OpenAlex, Scopus, Web of Science, and Springer Nature Open Access, together with supplementary searches of arXiv, medRxiv, and the Open Science Framework (OSF). Where available, the records retain original bibliographic metadata, database-specific retrieval identifiers, and associated search execution information, including search queries, retrieval dates, applied restrictions, and API or pagination parameters. These materials are released to improve the transparency, reproducibility, and auditability of the literature identification and retrieval process. They provide a source-level record of the search procedures and enable independent examination of database coverage, retrieval outcomes, and subsequent record identification and deduplication. Differences in database export formats, metadata completeness, and retrieval mechanisms reflect the characteristics and technical constraints of the respective information sources. The files deposited in this record document the search procedures and evidence retrieval underlying the finalized review. They should not be interpreted as the final set of eligible or included studies, as records underwent subsequent deduplication, screening, eligibility assessment, and evidence classification. The finalized annotation and reconciliation materials are deposited separately on Zenodo, while the associated study protocol and registration materials are maintained on OSF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: