Evaluating hybrid human-LLM coding workflows for qualitative research in medical education: A generalizability study

Introduction Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed as deductive coders in qualitative research, but their measurement properties remain underexplored. This study applies generalizability theory to evaluate whether hybrid human-LLM workflow configurations can achieve reliable mode-outcomes as an alternative consensus-generating mechanism for deductive coding tasks in medical education research.Methods Three commercial LLMs (GPT-5.2, Claude Opus 4.5, Gemini 3-Flash Preview) coded 741 excerpts from a published audit of AI-related policy documents at 146 U.S. medical schools against a 24-subtheme deductive framework. Mixed-effects logistic regression assessed variability in agreement with human consensus across coder type (human versus LLM), excerpt characteristics (complexity and length), and coding conditions (sequential independent versus batched processing). A simulation-based D-study forecasted agreement levels for various hybrid human-LLM configurations.Results Sequential independent LLM coding showed agreement comparable to human coding (β = −0.14, p = 0.326). Batched processing showed significantly lower human-LLM agreement (β = −0.41, p = 0.007) and substantial batch-related variance (variance = 30.16). The three LLMs produced similar agreement (joint Wald χ2 = 0.15, p = 0.930), and LLM-LLM agreement (κ = 0.750–0.755) substantially exceeded human-human agreement (κ = 0.422) and human-versus-consensus agreement (κ = 0.420–0.533). LLM disagreements were more systematically patterned across the codebook (Cramer’s V = 0.554–0.585) than human disagreements (Cramer’s V = 0.196). Simulations forecasted agreement ranging from 0.520 to 0.529 when two or more LLMs were paired with one to two human coders. These forecasted agreement levels for hybrid human-LLM workflows fell within the range of human-versus-consensus agreement.Discussion D-study simulations support the use of hybrid human-LLM workflows to reach coding consensus for deductive reasoning tasks through mode responses, an alternative consensus-generating mechanism to traditional adjudication discussions. Future work should examine whether these patterns extend across additional deductive coding contexts and model families.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medical Teacher
Published
2026-08-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2026.2721362
Primary Topic
Wikis in Education and Collaboration
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating hybrid human-LLM coding workflows for qualitative research in medical education: A generalizability study

Rebecca S. Lufler, Md Nazmul Karim, Victoria A. Roach, Christopher Facer et al.
Medical Teacher
Wikis in Education and Collaboration
article

Evaluating hybrid human-LLM coding workflows for qualitative research in medical education: A generalizability study

Rebecca S. Lufler, Md Nazmul Karim, Victoria A. Roach, Christopher Facer, Robert M. Becker, Elizabeth R. Agosto, Jessica N. Byram, Abdel Metwally, Kirsten Brown, Chloie Flores, Kyle A. Robertson, Nicole DeVaul, Leslie A. Hoffman, Danielle N. Edwards, Emily Rush, Hannah L. Herriott, Adam B. Wilson, Dahlia Chavez, Colleen N. Garnett, Alexandra Wactor, Megan E. Kruskie, Sara Aqel, Truman Steele, Daniel Martin, Daniel J Mumbower, Sophia Boxerman, Margaret Checchi, Joshua Samaniego, Alison F. Doubleday, Melissa Petito, George S. Yacu, Seth Adler, Ali Akram, Laura Smith, Suzanne Smith, Emily Nguyen, Yi Gao, Melissa Barbosa
article en

Abstract

Introduction Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed as deductive coders in qualitative research, but their measurement properties remain underexplored. This study applies generalizability theory to evaluate whether hybrid human-LLM workflow configurations can achieve reliable mode-outcomes as an alternative consensus-generating mechanism for deductive coding tasks in medical education research.Methods Three commercial LLMs (GPT-5.2, Claude Opus 4.5, Gemini 3-Flash Preview) coded 741 excerpts from a published audit of AI-related policy documents at 146 U.S. medical schools against a 24-subtheme deductive framework. Mixed-effects logistic regression assessed variability in agreement with human consensus across coder type (human versus LLM), excerpt characteristics (complexity and length), and coding conditions (sequential independent versus batched processing). A simulation-based D-study forecasted agreement levels for various hybrid human-LLM configurations.Results Sequential independent LLM coding showed agreement comparable to human coding (β = −0.14, p = 0.326). Batched processing showed significantly lower human-LLM agreement (β = −0.41, p = 0.007) and substantial batch-related variance (variance = 30.16). The three LLMs produced similar agreement (joint Wald χ2 = 0.15, p = 0.930), and LLM-LLM agreement (κ = 0.750–0.755) substantially exceeded human-human agreement (κ = 0.422) and human-versus-consensus agreement (κ = 0.420–0.533). LLM disagreements were more systematically patterned across the codebook (Cramer’s V = 0.554–0.585) than human disagreements (Cramer’s V = 0.196). Simulations forecasted agreement ranging from 0.520 to 0.529 when two or more LLMs were paired with one to two human coders. These forecasted agreement levels for hybrid human-LLM workflows fell within the range of human-versus-consensus agreement.Discussion D-study simulations support the use of hybrid human-LLM workflows to reach coding consensus for deductive reasoning tasks through mode responses, an alternative consensus-generating mechanism to traditional adjudication discussions. Future work should examine whether these patterns extend across additional deductive coding contexts and model families.

Medical Teacher
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US), Tufts University (US), Regis University (US), University of Louisville (US), Illinois College (US), George Washington University (US), University of Aberdeen (GB), University of Washington (US), University of Alabama at Birmingham (US), University of Illinois Chicago (US), Indiana University School of Medicine, Rush University (US), Monash University (AU), Indiana University (US), Marian University - Indiana (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Wikis in Education and Collaboration
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.