Diese Seite wurde automatisch übersetzt und die Genauigkeit der Übersetzung wird nicht garantiert. Bitte wende dich an die englische Version für einen Quelltext.

AI-Assisted Adaptive Simulation in Physiology Education (PBL)

20. Mai 2026 aktualisiert von: Jeevarathinam Thirumalai, Saveetha University

Effect of Adaptive AI-Supported Simulation on Physiology Learning Outcomes Among Medical Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial

This randomized controlled trial evaluated whether an AI-assisted, rule-based adaptive screen-based simulation module could improve physiology learning outcomes among undergraduate health science students compared with conventional instruction. A total of 672 students from Physiotherapy, Occupational Therapy, Nursing, and Allied Health Sciences were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the adaptive simulation group or the conventional teaching group. The intervention used web-based clinical physiology cases with algorithm-supported case sequencing, automated formative feedback, and structured faculty-led debriefing, while the control group received standard lectures, textbook reading, tutorial sessions, and laboratory practicals. The primary outcomes were physiological knowledge and reasoning ability, and the secondary outcomes were conceptual understanding, engagement, cognitive load, and academic self-efficacy. Assessments were performed at baseline, immediately after the 12-week intervention, and again at four-week follow-up.

Studienübersicht

Status

Abgeschlossen

Bedingungen

Intervention / Behandlung

Detaillierte Beschreibung

This study was designed as a prospective, two-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial with repeated-measures assessment at three time points: baseline, immediately post-intervention, and four weeks after the intervention. It was conducted at Saveetha Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, India, between August 2025 and January 2026, and received institutional ethical approval before enrollment. Participants were undergraduate health science students aged 18 to 25 years who were enrolled in a Human Physiology course and had access to an internet-enabled personal device. Students with prior formal exposure to simulation-based physiology instruction or adaptive digital learning platforms were excluded. After baseline assessment, participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the intervention or control group, with allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessment.

The intervention group received physiology instruction through a screen-based adaptive simulation environment over 12 weeks. The module was intentionally designed as a bundled educational strategy integrating adaptive case sequencing, automated formative feedback, and faculty-led debriefing. The adaptive component used predefined rule-based logic to personalize learning by adjusting case difficulty and feedback pathways according to learner performance; it did not use autonomous generative artificial intelligence or clinical decision-making. Participants completed structured simulation sessions for two hours per week, including pre-briefing, individual case-based simulation, and facilitated debriefing. The control group received conventional curriculum-based physiology instruction over the same 12-week period, including didactic lectures, prescribed textbook readings, tutorial sessions, and laboratory practicals.

The study prioritized objective learning outcomes. Physiological knowledge was measured using a 40-item multiple-choice test, physiological reasoning ability using a scenario-based rubric-scored assessment, and conceptual understanding using a physiology concept inventory. Secondary outcomes included student engagement measured with the USEI, cognitive load measured with NASA-TLX, and academic self-efficacy measured with an adapted CASES scale. Outcomes were collected at baseline, post-intervention, and follow-up using the same instruments across all time points.

Studientyp

Interventionell

Einschreibung (Tatsächlich)

672

Phase

  • Unzutreffend

Kontakte und Standorte

Dieser Abschnitt enthält die Kontaktdaten derjenigen, die die Studie durchführen, und Informationen darüber, wo diese Studie durchgeführt wird.

Studienorte

  • Indien
    • Tamil Nadu
      • Chennai, Tamil Nadu, Indien, 602105
        • Saveetha Institute of Basic Medical Sciences (SIBMS), Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences (SIMATS)

Teilnahmekriterien

Forscher suchen nach Personen, die einer bestimmten Beschreibung entsprechen, die als Auswahlkriterien bezeichnet werden. Einige Beispiele für diese Kriterien sind der allgemeine Gesundheitszustand einer Person oder frühere Behandlungen.

Zulassungskriterien

Studienberechtigtes Alter

  • Erwachsene

Akzeptiert gesunde Freiwillige

Ja

Beschreibung

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Undergraduate students enrolled in Health Science programs including Physiotherapy, Occupational Therapy, Nursing, and Allied Health Sciences
  • Registered for a Human Physiology course during the study period
  • Age between 18 and 25 years
  • Proficiency in English language
  • Access to an internet-enabled personal device capable of supporting web-based educational applications
  • Willingness to provide written informed consent for participation

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Prior formal exposure to structured simulation-based physiology instruction
  • Prior exposure to adaptive digital learning platforms related to physiology education
  • Inability to access or use internet-enabled educational applications required for the intervention
  • Declined or withdrew informed consent for participation

Studienplan

Dieser Abschnitt enthält Einzelheiten zum Studienplan, einschließlich des Studiendesigns und der Messung der Studieninhalte.

Wie ist die Studie aufgebaut?

Designdetails

  • Hauptzweck: Grundlegende Wissenschaft
  • Zuteilung: Zufällig
  • Interventionsmodell: Parallele Zuordnung
  • Maskierung: Single

Waffen und Interventionen

Teilnehmergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandlung
Experimental: I-Assisted Adaptive Simulation Group
Participants received AI-assisted algorithm-supported adaptive screen-based physiology simulation over a 12-week period. The intervention included adaptive case sequencing, automated formative feedback, interactive clinical reasoning activities, animated physiological visualization, and structured faculty-led debriefing sessions aligned with physiology curriculum objectives.
Verhalten: AI-Assisted Algorithm-Supported Adaptive Simulation
The intervention consisted of an AI-assisted algorithm-supported adaptive screen-based physiology simulation delivered over 12 weeks. Participants engaged in structured web-based simulation sessions involving interactive clinical case scenarios, animated physiological visualizations, adaptive case sequencing, automated formative feedback, and faculty-led debriefing. The adaptive instructional system operated through predefined rule-based educational algorithms that adjusted case difficulty, feedback pathways, and learning progression according to participant performance within faculty-defined parameters. Sessions included pre-briefing, individual simulation-based clinical reasoning activities, adaptive feedback, and reflective debriefing. The intervention was implemented in alignment with the INACSL Healthcare Simulation Standards of Best Practice and focused on improving physiological knowledge, conceptual understanding, and clinical reasoning skills.
Andere Namen:
  • Adaptive Screen-Based Simulation
  • AI-Assisted Adaptive Simulation
  • Rule-Based Adaptive Simulation
  • Adaptive Physiology Simulation Platform
Aktiver Komparator: Conventional Instruction Group
Participants received standard curriculum-based physiology instruction over a 12-week period, including didactic lectures, prescribed textbook readings, faculty-guided tutorial sessions, and scheduled laboratory practicals covering core physiological systems.
Verhalten: Conventional Physiology Instruction
Participants received standard curriculum-based physiology instruction over a 12-week period according to institutional teaching guidelines. Conventional instruction included didactic lectures, prescribed textbook readings, faculty-guided tutorial sessions, and scheduled laboratory practicals covering cardiovascular, respiratory, renal, neurological, endocrine, gastrointestinal, musculoskeletal, and integumentary physiology. Tutorial sessions focused on instructor-led clarification of physiological concepts, small-group discussion, and question-and-answer interactions. Laboratory practicals included supervised physiological measurements, observation of physiological demonstrations, interpretation of experimental findings, and guided analysis of physiological responses. The control condition did not include adaptive simulation, automated formative feedback, algorithm-supported instructional adaptation, or structured simulation-based clinical reasoning activities.
Andere Namen:
  • Standard Curriculum-Based Teaching
  • Conventional Teaching
  • Didactic Physiology Education
  • Traditional Physiology Instruction

Was misst die Studie?

Primäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
Physiological Reasoning Ability
Zeitfenster: Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Physiological reasoning ability was assessed using a scenario-based assessment requiring hypothesis generation, interpretation of physiological data, and application of physiological mechanisms to management decisions. Responses were scored using a standardized four-point analytic rubric assessing reasoning and clinical interpretation skills. Higher scores indicate better physiological reasoning ability.
Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Physiological Knowledge
Zeitfenster: Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Physiological knowledge was assessed using a faculty-developed 40-item multiple-choice assessment designed to evaluate conceptual understanding and applied physiological reasoning across eight core physiological systems, including cardiovascular, respiratory, renal, neurological, endocrine, gastrointestinal, musculoskeletal, and integumentary physiology. Higher scores indicate better physiology knowledge performance.
Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Conceptual Understanding
Zeitfenster: Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Conceptual understanding was assessed using a faculty-developed Physiology Concept Inventory designed to evaluate deep conceptual understanding, integration of physiological mechanisms across systems, and identification of common physiological misconceptions. Higher scores indicate better conceptual understanding of physiology concepts.
Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)

Sekundäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
Student Engagement
Zeitfenster: Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Student engagement was assessed using the University Student Engagement Inventory (USEI), which evaluates behavioral, emotional, and cognitive dimensions of learner engagement. Higher scores indicate greater learner engagement during physiology learning activities.
Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Cognitive Load
Zeitfenster: Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Cognitive load was assessed using the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX), a multidimensional measure evaluating perceived cognitive workload and task demand during learning activities. Higher scores indicate greater perceived cognitive workload.
Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Academic Self-Efficacy
Zeitfenster: Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)
Academic self-efficacy was measured using an adapted version of the College Academic Self-Efficacy Scale (CASES) to evaluate learner confidence in physiology-related academic tasks and simulation-based learning activities. Higher scores indicate greater academic self-efficacy.
Baseline (Week 1), post-intervention (Week 13), and follow-up (Week 17)

Mitarbeiter und Ermittler

Hier finden Sie Personen und Organisationen, die an dieser Studie beteiligt sind.

Sponsor

Saveetha University

Publikationen und hilfreiche Links

Die Bereitstellung dieser Publikationen erfolgt freiwillig durch die für die Eingabe von Informationen über die Studie verantwortliche Person. Diese können sich auf alles beziehen, was mit dem Studium zu tun hat.

Allgemeine Veröffentlichungen

Studienaufzeichnungsdaten

Diese Daten verfolgen den Fortschritt der Übermittlung von Studienaufzeichnungen und zusammenfassenden Ergebnissen an ClinicalTrials.gov. Studienaufzeichnungen und gemeldete Ergebnisse werden von der National Library of Medicine (NLM) überprüft, um sicherzustellen, dass sie bestimmten Qualitätskontrollstandards entsprechen, bevor sie auf der öffentlichen Website veröffentlicht werden.

Haupttermine studieren

Studienbeginn (Tatsächlich)

1. August 2025

Primärer Abschluss (Tatsächlich)

31. Januar 2026

Studienabschluss (Tatsächlich)

31. Januar 2026

Studienanmeldedaten

Zuerst eingereicht

15. Mai 2026

Zuerst eingereicht, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt hat

20. Mai 2026

Zuerst gepostet (Tatsächlich)

27. Mai 2026

Studienaufzeichnungsaktualisierungen

Letztes Update gepostet (Tatsächlich)

27. Mai 2026

Letztes eingereichtes Update, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt

20. Mai 2026

Zuletzt verifiziert

1. Mai 2026

Mehr Informationen

Begriffe im Zusammenhang mit dieser Studie

Schlüsselwörter

Andere Studien-ID-Nummern

  • 24/032/2025/SR/SIBMS

Plan für individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD)

Planen Sie, individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD) zu teilen?

NEIN

Beschreibung des IPD-Plans

Individual participant data (IPD) will not be publicly shared because the dataset contains institution-linked educational performance information and participant-level academic assessment data. De-identified data may be considered for academic collaboration upon reasonable request to the corresponding author, subject to institutional ethical approval and data-sharing regulations.

Arzneimittel- und Geräteinformationen, Studienunterlagen

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Arzneimittelprodukt

Nein

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Geräteprodukt

Nein

Diese Informationen wurden ohne Änderungen direkt von der Website clinicaltrials.gov abgerufen. Wenn Sie Ihre Studiendaten ändern, entfernen oder aktualisieren möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an register@clinicaltrials.gov. Sobald eine Änderung auf clinicaltrials.gov implementiert wird, wird diese automatisch auch auf unserer Website aktualisiert .

Klinische Studien zur Gesundheitsberufe Bildung

Suchen Sie nach ähnlichen Studien

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

CROs by country

CROs in Portugal

Bedingungen

Seltene Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

Nahrungsergänzungsmittel

Sponsor / Mitarbeiter

Standorte

Abonnieren