Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 10, 2026

Qualitative and Quantitative Validation of Tools with Rating Scales Aimed at Assessing the Quality of University Service-Learning
Published on: August 29, 2025
A Pilot Study on Generative Artificial Intelligence's Reliability in Qualitative Research Quality Appraisal Using
Hisba Shereefdeen1, Abhinand Thaivalappil2,3, Ian Young3
1University of Guelph, ON, Canada.
Generative artificial intelligence (genAI) tools show potential in qualitative research appraisal. ChatGPT demonstrated inconsistent agreement with human reviewers on appraisal checklists, particularly for interpretive elements.
Area of Science:
- Qualitative Research Methods
- Artificial Intelligence in Research
- Health Sciences Research
Background:
- Generative artificial intelligence (genAI) is increasingly integrated into research workflows.
- The application of genAI for quality appraisal in qualitative research is underexplored.
- Systematic review processes have begun exploring genAI, but quality appraisal needs further investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate ChatGPT's performance in appraising qualitative research using established checklists.
- To compare genAI appraisals with human assessments for consistency and reliability.
- To identify areas where genAI excels and struggles in qualitative research quality appraisal.
Main Methods:
- Two human reviewers applied the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists to 21 qualitative studies.
- ChatGPT (GPT-5) was prompted to appraise the same studies using the checklists.
- Interrater reliability (kappa) and crude agreement were calculated to compare human and genAI assessments.
Main Results:
- Agreement between human reviewers and ChatGPT ranged from none to moderate for CASP items (kappa: <.00-.46) and none to substantial for JBI items (kappa: <.00-.83).
- Highest agreement was observed for objective, reporting-based items (e.g., study aims, ethics, value, participant voices).
- Greatest disagreement occurred for subjective, interpretive items (e.g., research design, researcher-participant relationships, worldview-methodology congruity).
Conclusions:
- ChatGPT (GPT-5) reliably identifies objective components in qualitative research appraisal but inconsistently assesses nuanced, context-dependent elements.
- Current genAI use for qualitative research quality appraisal requires careful human oversight and adherence to transparency and data privacy principles.
- Further research is needed to refine genAI tools for complex qualitative appraisal tasks.
Related Concept Videos
Reliability and Validity
Qualitative Analysis
For instance, group IV...
Qualitative Analysis
There are two main approaches to qualitative analysis:...
Quality Assurance
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Distribution Reliability and Automation
