Cited by 30Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in EducationHealth Education and Validation

Comparative analysis of NCLEX-RN questions: a duel between ChatGPT and human expertise

Cox, Rachel L., Hunt, Karen L., Hill, Rebecca R.·2023·Journal of Nursing Education

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to revolutionize nursing education. This study compared NCLEX-RN questions generated by AI and those created by nurse educators. Method: Faculty of accredited baccalaureate programs were invited to participate. Likert-scale items for grammar and clarity of the item stem and distractors were compared using Mann-Whitney U, and yes/no questions about clinical relevance and complex terminology were analyzed using chi-square. A one-sample binomial test with confidence intervals evaluated participants' question preference (AI-generated or educator-written). Qualitative responses identified themes across faculty. Results: Item clarity, grammar, and difficulty were similar for AI and educator-created questions. Clinical relevance and use of complex terminology was similar for all question pairs. Of the four sets with preference for one item, three were generated by AI. Conclusion: AI can assist faculty with item generation to prepare nursing students for the NCLEX-RN examination. Faculty expertise is necessary to refine questions written using both methods. [ J Nurs Educ . 2023;62(12):679–687.]

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3928/01484834-20231006-07

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cox, R. L., Hunt, K. L., & Hill, R. R.
Affiliations
MGH Institute of Health Professions (US)
Corresponding author
Cox, Rachel L.
Venue
Journal of Nursing Education
Publisher
SLACK, Inc.
Published
2023-12
Volume
62
Issue
12
Pages
679-687
ISSN
  • 0148-4834 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-2421
OpenAlex
W4389323382
Cited by
30
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Nursing Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
NCLEX-RN, ChatGPT, AI-generated test items, item generation, nursing faculty, item clarity, distractor quality, clinical relevance, nursing licensure examination preparation
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Education, Nursing, Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate, Educational Measurement, Humans, Licensure, Nursing, Students, Nursing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review