Esta página se tradujo automáticamente y no se garantiza la precisión de la traducción. por favor refiérase a versión inglesa para un texto fuente.

Large Language Model Assistance for Clinical Decision-Making Among Rural Physicians

14 de julio de 2026 actualizado por: tao liyuan, Peking University Third Hospital

Effect of Large Language Model Assistance on Clinical Decision-Making Among Rural Physicians: A Randomized Controlled Trial

This study will evaluate whether, relative to conventional information retrieval approaches, direct large language models (LLM) access and LLM use training can improve the overall clinical decision-making ability of rural physicians in low-resource grassroots healthcare settings.

Descripción general del estudio

Descripción detallada

Rural physicians play an essential role in the diagnosis and management of common and frequently occurring conditions, referral decision-making, chronic disease management, and patient education. In resource-constrained primary care settings, they often face limited access to medical information and specialist support, delays in updating clinical knowledge and guidelines, and substantial pressure in clinical decision-making. These challenges are particularly relevant in northwestern China, where primary care resources are relatively limited. Improving rural physicians' abilities in diagnostic assessment, recognition of clinical warning signs, and rational prescribing is therefore an important priority for strengthening primary healthcare services.

Large language models (LLMs) can support medical information retrieval, organization of diagnostic and management approaches, differential diagnosis, medication-related decision-making, patient education, and follow-up planning, and may therefore serve as accessible tools for supporting clinical decision-making in primary care. However, general-purpose LLMs were not specifically developed for use in resource-constrained primary care settings and have not been adequately evaluated among rural physicians. Their responses may contain factual errors or fabricated evidence, overlook warning signs, provide insufficient medication safety warnings, or recommend investigations and treatments that are not feasible in local primary care settings. Without adequate verification skills, physicians may fail to benefit from LLM assistance and may even introduce new safety risks. It is therefore important to evaluate how rural physicians use LLMs and whether structured training can improve the safe and effective use of these tools before their wider implementation.

This randomized controlled trial will evaluate the effects of LLM assistance and brief training on clinical decision-making among rural physicians. Participants will complete clinical cases involving common conditions encountered in primary care, with tasks assessing diagnostic judgment, recognition of warning signs, rational treatment, and patient education. Some participants will also use the LLM as a second-opinion tool to review and revise their initial decisions. All responses will be independently evaluated by reviewers blinded to group assignment using standardized scoring criteria to assess overall clinical decision-making performance and safety.

Tipo de estudio

Intervencionista

Inscripción (Estimado)

240

Fase

  • No aplica

Contactos y Ubicaciones

Esta sección proporciona los datos de contacto de quienes realizan el estudio e información sobre dónde se lleva a cabo este estudio.

Estudio Contacto

  • Nombre: Liyuan Tao, MD
  • Número de teléfono: +86 82265732
  • Correo electrónico: tendytly@163.com

Ubicaciones de estudio

    • Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region
      • Karamay, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Porcelana
        • Xinjiang Second Medical College
        • Contacto:
          • Zejiang Ma, Master of Medicine
          • Número de teléfono: +86 18811331959
          • Correo electrónico: 18811331959@163.com

Criterios de participación

Los investigadores buscan personas que se ajusten a una determinada descripción, denominada criterio de elegibilidad. Algunos ejemplos de estos criterios son el estado de salud general de una persona o tratamientos previos.

Criterio de elegibilidad

Edades elegibles para estudiar

  • Adulto
  • Adulto Mayor

Acepta Voluntarios Saludables

Sí

Descripción

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Currently engaged in clinical practice at a rural primary healthcare institution in northwestern China.
  • Has received formal medical education and holds a relevant diploma or degree.
  • Able to read and understand clinical case materials in Chinese.
  • Able to use a computer to complete the study tasks.
  • Willing to participate and able to provide written informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previously involved in the development of the clinical case tasks, reference answers, or scoring rubric for this study.
  • Previously participated in pilot testing involving the same clinical case tasks or study procedures.

Plan de estudios

Esta sección proporciona detalles del plan de estudio, incluido cómo está diseñado el estudio y qué mide el estudio.

¿Cómo está diseñado el estudio?

Detalles de diseño

  • Propósito principal: Investigación de servicios de salud
  • Asignación: Aleatorizado
  • Modelo Intervencionista: Asignación factorial
  • Enmascaramiento: Único

Armas e Intervenciones

Grupo de participantes/brazo
Intervención / Tratamiento
Comparador activo: Conventional Resources Followed by LLM Second Opinion
Participants receive no LLM-use training. During the initial 60-minute assessment, they complete the clinical cases using conventional non-LLM resources only. After submitting their initial responses, they receive an additional 30 minutes to use the study-provided LLM as a second-opinion tool to review and revise their responses.
During the initial 60-minute assessment, participants complete primary care clinical cases using conventional non-LLM resources only, including clinical guidelines, textbooks, drug labels, training materials, medical websites, and standard search engines. Participants are not permitted to use LLMs during this phase.
After completing and submitting their initial responses using conventional non-LLM resources, participants receive an additional 30 minutes to use the study-provided DeepSeek-V4 as a second-opinion tool. They may review, verify, and revise their initial clinical decisions before submitting their final responses.
Experimental: Direct LLM Assistance
Participants receive no LLM-use training and may use the study-provided LLM throughout the initial 60-minute assessment to complete the clinical cases. They submit their final responses at 60 minutes and do not participate in the additional second-opinion phase.
During the initial 60-minute assessment, participants may use the study-provided DeepSeek-V4 to assist with medical information retrieval, diagnostic and management reasoning, identification of warning signs, referral decisions, rational prescribing, patient education, and follow-up planning. Participants remain responsible for their final clinical decisions and responses.
Experimental: LLM Training and Conventional Resources Followed by LLM Second Opinion
Participants receive brief structured training on the safe and effective use of LLMs. During the initial 60-minute assessment, they complete the clinical cases using conventional non-LLM resources only. After submitting their initial responses, they receive an additional 30 minutes to use the study-provided LLM as a second-opinion tool to review and revise their responses.
During the initial 60-minute assessment, participants complete primary care clinical cases using conventional non-LLM resources only, including clinical guidelines, textbooks, drug labels, training materials, medical websites, and standard search engines. Participants are not permitted to use LLMs during this phase.
After completing and submitting their initial responses using conventional non-LLM resources, participants receive an additional 30 minutes to use the study-provided DeepSeek-V4 as a second-opinion tool. They may review, verify, and revise their initial clinical decisions before submitting their final responses.
Before completing the clinical cases, participants receive brief structured training on the safe and effective use of LLMs. The training covers the role and limitations of LLMs, structured prompting and follow-up questioning, identification of warning signs and referral indications, medication safety, verification of LLM-generated information, high-risk situations in which LLMs should not be relied upon, and protection of patient privacy.
Experimental: LLM Training and Direct LLM Assistance
Participants receive brief structured training on the safe and effective use of LLMs and may use the study-provided LLM throughout the initial 60-minute assessment to complete the clinical cases. They submit their final responses at 60 minutes and do not participate in the additional second-opinion phase.
During the initial 60-minute assessment, participants may use the study-provided DeepSeek-V4 to assist with medical information retrieval, diagnostic and management reasoning, identification of warning signs, referral decisions, rational prescribing, patient education, and follow-up planning. Participants remain responsible for their final clinical decisions and responses.
Before completing the clinical cases, participants receive brief structured training on the safe and effective use of LLMs. The training covers the role and limitations of LLMs, structured prompting and follow-up questioning, identification of warning signs and referral indications, medication safety, verification of LLM-generated information, high-risk situations in which LLMs should not be relied upon, and protection of patient privacy.

¿Qué mide el estudio?

Medidas de resultado primarias

Medida de resultado
Medida Descripción
Periodo de tiempo
Overall Clinical Decision-Making Score
Periodo de tiempo: At the end of the initial 60-minute assessment
Participants' responses to primary care clinical cases will be evaluated using a prespecified scoring rubric. The overall score will reflect performance across key components of clinical decision-making. Higher scores indicate better overall clinical decision-making performance.
At the end of the initial 60-minute assessment

Medidas de resultado secundarias

Medida de resultado
Medida Descripción
Periodo de tiempo
Diagnostic Judgment Domain Score
Periodo de tiempo: At the end of the initial 60-minute assessment
Participants' diagnostic judgment in response to primary care clinical cases will be evaluated using a predefined scoring rubric. Higher scores indicate better diagnostic judgment.
At the end of the initial 60-minute assessment
Clinical Warning Sign Recognition Domain Score
Periodo de tiempo: At the end of the initial 60-minute assessment
Participants' ability to identify clinically important warning signs in primary care clinical cases will be evaluated using a predefined scoring rubric. Higher scores indicate better recognition of clinical warning signs.
At the end of the initial 60-minute assessment
Treatment Plan Domain Score
Periodo de tiempo: At the end of the initial 60-minute assessment
Participants' proposed treatment plans for primary care clinical cases will be evaluated using a predefined scoring rubric. Higher scores indicate better treatment planning performance.
At the end of the initial 60-minute assessment
Change in Overall Clinical Decision-Making Score After LLM Review
Periodo de tiempo: Change from 60 to 90 minutes after the start of the assessment
Among participants assigned to the LLM second-opinion phase, the change in overall clinical decision-making score will be calculated as the score after LLM-assisted review minus the score before LLM-assisted review. Positive values indicate improvement in overall clinical decision-making performance.
Change from 60 to 90 minutes after the start of the assessment

Colaboradores e Investigadores

Aquí es donde encontrará personas y organizaciones involucradas en este estudio.

Fechas de registro del estudio

Estas fechas rastrean el progreso del registro del estudio y los envíos de resultados resumidos a ClinicalTrials.gov. Los registros del estudio y los resultados informados son revisados ​​por la Biblioteca Nacional de Medicina (NLM) para asegurarse de que cumplan con los estándares de control de calidad específicos antes de publicarlos en el sitio web público.

Fechas importantes del estudio

Inicio del estudio (Estimado)

1 de julio de 2026

Finalización primaria (Estimado)

1 de agosto de 2026

Finalización del estudio (Estimado)

1 de septiembre de 2026

Fechas de registro del estudio

Enviado por primera vez

14 de julio de 2026

Primero enviado que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad

14 de julio de 2026

Publicado por primera vez (Actual)

17 de julio de 2026

Actualizaciones de registros de estudio

Última actualización publicada (Actual)

17 de julio de 2026

Última actualización enviada que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad

14 de julio de 2026

Última verificación

1 de julio de 2026

Más información

Términos relacionados con este estudio

Otros números de identificación del estudio

  • IRB00006761-M20260614

Plan de datos de participantes individuales (IPD)

¿Planea compartir datos de participantes individuales (IPD)?

NO

Información sobre medicamentos y dispositivos, documentos del estudio

Estudia un producto farmacéutico regulado por la FDA de EE. UU.

No

Estudia un producto de dispositivo regulado por la FDA de EE. UU.

No

Esta información se obtuvo directamente del sitio web clinicaltrials.gov sin cambios. Si tiene alguna solicitud para cambiar, eliminar o actualizar los detalles de su estudio, comuníquese con register@clinicaltrials.gov. Tan pronto como se implemente un cambio en clinicaltrials.gov, también se actualizará automáticamente en nuestro sitio web. .

Suscribir