Denne side blev automatisk oversat, og nøjagtigheden af ​​oversættelsen er ikke garanteret. Der henvises til engelsk version for en kildetekst.

Generative AI-Based Evaluation of Clinical Thinking and Decision-Making in Medical Students

30. oktober 2026 opdateret af: Danzhi Chen, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital

Construction of an Intelligent Evaluation System for Clinical Thinking and Decision-making Ability of Medical Students Based on Generative Artificial Intelligence

The goal of this study is to develop and evaluate an intelligent system based on generative artificial intelligence (AI) for assessing clinical thinking and decision-making abilities in medical students.

The study will examine whether the AI-based evaluation system can provide reliable and valid assessments of medical students' performance in clinical scenarios. Participants will complete clinical case-based tasks designed to assess their clinical reasoning and decision-making abilities. Their responses will be evaluated using the AI-based system and compared with assessments made using established evaluation methods and/or expert ratings.

The findings of this study may help determine whether generative AI can be used as a practical tool for assessing clinical thinking and decision-making skills in medical education.

Studieoversigt

Status

Afsluttet

Betingelser

Intervention / Behandling

Detaljeret beskrivelse

This study aims to develop and evaluate a generative artificial intelligence-based system for assessing clinical thinking and decision-making abilities in medical students. Clinical reasoning and decision-making are core competencies in medical education, but conventional assessment methods often require substantial faculty time and may be influenced by differences among evaluators.

The study will develop an intelligent evaluation framework using generative artificial intelligence to analyze medical students' responses to clinical case-based tasks. The system will assess key aspects of clinical thinking and decision-making, such as information interpretation, diagnostic reasoning, selection of appropriate management strategies, and overall decision-making logic.

Medical students participating in the study will complete standardized clinical scenarios or case-based assessment tasks. Their performance will be evaluated using the artificial intelligence-based system and compared with evaluations made by qualified clinical experts and/or established assessment methods. The study will examine the reliability, validity, consistency, and feasibility of the artificial intelligence-based evaluation approach.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether generative artificial intelligence can serve as a reliable and practical tool for evaluating clinical thinking and decision-making abilities in medical education. The system is intended for educational assessment and is not designed to replace clinical diagnosis or treatment decisions.

Undersøgelsestype

Interventionel

Tilmelding (Faktiske)

90

Fase

  • Ikke anvendelig

Kontakter og lokationer

Dette afsnit indeholder kontaktoplysninger for dem, der udfører undersøgelsen, og oplysninger om, hvor denne undersøgelse udføres.

Studiesteder

    • Zhejiang
      • Hangzhou, Zhejiang, Kina, 310000
        • Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine

Deltagelseskriterier

Forskere leder efter personer, der passer til en bestemt beskrivelse, kaldet berettigelseskriterier. Nogle eksempler på disse kriterier er en persons generelle helbredstilstand eller tidligere behandlinger.

Berettigelseskriterier

Aldre berettiget til at studere

18 år til 30 år (Voksen)

Tager imod sunde frivillige

Ingen

Køn, der er berettiget til at studere

Alle

Beskrivelse

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Aged 18 to 30 years.
  • Fourth- or fifth-year undergraduate students majoring in Clinical Medicine at Zhejiang University School of Medicine, or trainees who have completed at least one year of standardized residency training at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine.
  • Have completed basic surgery courses and theoretical learning related to breast diseases.
  • Voluntarily agree to participate in the study and provide written informed consent.
  • Have adequate communication and comprehension abilities.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Have previously participated in similar generative artificial intelligence (GAI)-based teaching intervention studies.
  • Are unable to complete the entire study because of rotation schedules or other conflicts.
  • Belong to vulnerable populations other than employees of the study institution or subordinates of the investigators, including individuals with mental illness, cognitive impairment, critical illness, pregnancy, or illiteracy.
  • Refuse or are unwilling to provide informed consent.

Studieplan

Dette afsnit indeholder detaljer om studieplanen, herunder hvordan undersøgelsen er designet, og hvad undersøgelsen måler.

Hvordan er undersøgelsen tilrettelagt?

Design detaljer

  • Primært formål: Andet
  • Tildeling: Randomiseret
  • Interventionel model: Parallel tildeling
  • Maskning: Enkelt

Våben og indgreb

Deltagergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandling
Aktiv komparator: Control Group: Traditional Teaching

the standardized surgical oncology teaching curriculum, utilizing standardized breast cancer teaching PowerPoint courseware.

Participants will receive standard traditional teaching, including routine classroom instruction, case-based learning, and teacher-guided discussion, without the use of the generative artificial intelligence-assisted learning component.

Eksperimentel: Intervention Group: Traditional Teaching Plus AI Assistance

the independently developed "Clinical Reasoning and Decision-Making Dialogue Evaluation System" on the basis of the same traditional teaching.

Participants will receive standard traditional teaching, including routine classroom instruction, case-based learning, and teacher-guided discussion, without the use of the generative artificial intelligence-assisted learning component.

The intervention consists of traditional medical education supplemented with a generative artificial intelligence-based learning tool. The tool will support students in clinical case analysis, reasoning, and decision-making exercises. The control group will receive the same traditional teaching without access to the AI-assisted learning component.

Hvad måler undersøgelsen?

Primære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Foranstaltningsbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Change in Clinical Reasoning Score on Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)
Tidsramme: Baseline to Week 4

The total score ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score indicates better clinical thinking and decision-making ability

Baseline to Week 4

Sekundære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Foranstaltningsbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) Between GAI-Based and Expert Assessment Scores
Tidsramme: Baseline to Week 4

Both Generative AI (GAI) and human experts will evaluate the participants using the clinical Reasoning Assessment Rubric. The agreement between the GAI-based scores and expert assessment scores will be evaluated using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) . The coefficient ranges from 0 to 1, where higher values indicate better agreement.

Baseline to Week 4
Time to Complete the Assessment
Tidsramme: During the clinical thinking and decision-making assessment at Week 4 (completion time measured in minutes).

Assessment completion time is defined as the duration, measured in minutes, from the initiation of the clinical thinking and decision-making assessment to its final submission by the participant. The time will be automatically recorded by the evaluation platform. Each participant's assessment completion time will be measured during the assessment conducted at Week 4.

During the clinical thinking and decision-making assessment at Week 4 (completion time measured in minutes).
Participant Satisfaction Score on the GAI-Assisted Evaluation System
Tidsramme: Week 4

Participant satisfaction will be measured using a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = Very Dissatisfied to 5 = Very Satisfied). A higher score indicates higher satisfaction with the GAI-assisted evaluation system.

Week 4

Samarbejdspartnere og efterforskere

Det er her, du vil finde personer og organisationer, der er involveret i denne undersøgelse.

Sponsor

Datoer for undersøgelser

Disse datoer sporer fremskridtene for indsendelser af undersøgelsesrekord og resumeresultater til ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieregistreringer og rapporterede resultater gennemgås af National Library of Medicine (NLM) for at sikre, at de opfylder specifikke kvalitetskontrolstandarder, før de offentliggøres på den offentlige hjemmeside.

Studer store datoer

Studiestart (Faktiske)

26. september 2025

Primær færdiggørelse (Faktiske)

25. december 2025

Studieafslutning (Faktiske)

25. december 2025

Datoer for studieregistrering

Først indsendt

9. oktober 2026

Først indsendt, der opfyldte QC-kriterier

30. oktober 2026

Først opslået (Faktiske)

4. november 2026

Opdateringer af undersøgelsesjournaler

Sidste opdatering sendt (Faktiske)

4. november 2026

Sidste opdatering indsendt, der opfyldte kvalitetskontrolkriterier

30. oktober 2026

Sidst verificeret

1. oktober 2026

Mere information

Begreber relateret til denne undersøgelse

Andre undersøgelses-id-numre

  • Research 2025734

Plan for individuelle deltagerdata (IPD)

Planlægger du at dele individuelle deltagerdata (IPD)?

INGEN

Lægemiddel- og udstyrsoplysninger, undersøgelsesdokumenter

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-reguleret lægemiddelprodukt

Ingen

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-reguleret enhedsprodukt

Ingen

Disse oplysninger blev hentet direkte fra webstedet clinicaltrials.gov uden ændringer. Hvis du har nogen anmodninger om at ændre, fjerne eller opdatere dine undersøgelsesoplysninger, bedes du kontakte register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en ændring er implementeret på clinicaltrials.gov, vil denne også blive opdateret automatisk på vores hjemmeside .