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

Designing a Large Language Model Architecture for Shared Decision Making and Informed Intentions (DEONCAI3-1)

15 de septiembre de 2026 actualizado por: Felix G. Rebitschek, Harding Center for Risk Literacy

DEONCAi 3-1: Can Large Language Models Support Shared Decision-Making and Informed Intentions in the Field: An Online Experiment Comparing Them to a Standard Model and to an Evidence-Based Decision Aid

This study investigates a novel, agentic Large Language Model (LLM) architecture designed to facilitate Shared Decision-Making (SDM) in healthcare. While patients increasingly use standard LLMs for health information, these models often struggle with multi-turn conversations and fail to adapt to varying reading levels, disadvantaging vulnerable groups. By utilizing an agentic state-machine, this project aims to overcome common LLM deficits-such as context loss and uncritical agreement-to ensure clinically accurate, participatory patient conversations. The study evaluates whether this architecture improves informed decision-making compared to standard LLMs, particularly for patients with low health literacy.

Descripción general del estudio

Descripción detallada

Background & Current State of Research Shared Decision-Making is widely recognized as the gold standard of patient-centered care. However, its successful implementation in clinical practice is frequently hindered by systemic time and budget constraints. Consequently, patients are increasingly turning to Large Language Models to independently access health information and navigate their medical options.

The Problem: Limitations of Standard LLMs Recent studies indicate that using standard LLMs can digitally reproduce existing health inequalities and participation gaps. These models struggle to adapt to different reading levels without a significant loss in quality. While highly developed prompting techniques can enhance clinical accuracy, the results remain highly variable depending on the specific model and technique used.

A central deficit becomes apparent in multi-turn interactions, which are essential for a natural SDM workflow. In these prolonged conversations, standard LLMs tend to exhibit "context rot," leading to a sharp decline in accuracy as the dialogue progresses. This issue is further exacerbated by model sycophancy (an uncritical tendency to agree with the user) and completion eagerness (a tendency to prematurely conclude the conversation). Because current LLMs often fail to meet evidence-based reporting standards and lack systematic validation of user comprehension, the burden of fact-checking remains entirely on the user. This dynamic significantly disadvantages vulnerable groups, particularly those with lower health literacy.

Project Objectives and Research Questions

This project proposes a technical and clinical solution to these challenges through the following core research questions:

Technical-Conceptual Framework: How can we develop a transparent and replicable workflow that formalizes the SDM process through an agentic state-machine, thereby eliminating structural deficits of LLMs (e.g., context rot and sycophancy) in prolonged interactions?

Clinical Evaluation (Primary Objective): Does this newly developed agentic LLM architecture achieve higher scores in participatory conversation management and demonstrate a significantly greater objective increase in informed decision-making among users during multi-turn interactions, compared to a standard baseline LLM?

Health Equity (Secondary Objective): To what extent can this agentic LLM architecture guarantee effective participatory conversation management for vulnerable patient groups with low health literacy?

Tipo de estudio

Intervencionista

Inscripción (Estimado)

330

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

Copia de seguridad de contactos de estudio

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:

  • Biological sex: Female.
  • Age: 40 to 70 years old.
  • Country of residence: United States (US) or United Kingdom (UK).
  • Language: Native English speaker (English as first language).
  • Registered and verified user on the academic research platform Prolific.
  • Able to read, understand, and provide informed consent digitally.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Individuals who do not meet the automated pre-screening criteria on the Prolific platform.
  • Inability to use or access a computer, smartphone, or internet browser required to complete the digital study.

Note: Quotas will be enforced during recruitment to ensure a 50/50 stratified split between participants with and without university entrance qualifications to guarantee variance in educational backgrounds. Once a quota is filled, further participants matching that educational profile will be excluded.

-

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 paralela
  • Enmascaramiento: Ninguno (etiqueta abierta)

Armas e Intervenciones

Grupo de participantes/brazo
Intervención / Tratamiento
Experimental: Shared Decision Making Chatbot
Participants will engage in a multi-turn, AI-assisted consultation about mammography screening. They will interact with a newly developed agentic Large Language Model architecture that uses an integrated state-machine designed to actively guide the Shared Decision-Making process, adapt to the user's reading level, and prevent context loss.
An interactive AI chatbot built with an agentic state-machine architecture designed to systematically guide users through the Shared Decision-Making process regarding mammography screening, with built-in ethical guardrails to prevent hallucination and sycophancy.
Comparador activo: Standard Chatbot
Participants will engage in a conversation about mammography screening using a standard, usual care Large Language Model (Mistral Large). This model represents the current consumer standard for AI health queries and lacks the specialized agentic state-machine and SDM workflow guidance.
An unmodified, standard generative Large Language Model chatbot acting as a baseline control, used by participants to discuss mammography screening.
Comparador activo: Information brochure
Participants will receive and read the standard informational patient brochure on mammography screening published by the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG). This represents the current standard of care for patient information.
The standard digital informational brochure on mammography screening provided by the german Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), used as a usual care baseline for patient education.

¿Qué mide el estudio?

Medidas de resultado primarias

Medida de resultado
Medida Descripción
Periodo de tiempo
Patient-Reported Quality of Shared Decision-Making
Periodo de tiempo: Day 1
Assessed using the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). This validated instrument measures the patient's perceived involvement in the medical decision-making process. The questionnaire consists of 9 items, each rated on a 6-point scale ranging from 0 ("completely disagree") to 5 ("completely agree"). The raw scores are summed and multiplied by 20/9 to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate a higher perceived quality and greater patient involvement in shared decision-making.
Day 1

Medidas de resultado secundarias

Medida de resultado
Medida Descripción
Periodo de tiempo
Multidimensional Informed Decision-Making
Periodo de tiempo: Day 1
Based on Marteau's conceptualization of informed decision-making. An informed decision is achieved when a participant has sufficient objective knowledge about mammography screening and their behavioral intention (to screen or not to screen) is congruent with their personal attitudes toward the screening. This is calculated as a composite measure integrating an objective knowledge test, an attitude assessment, and a screening intention question. Higher objective knowledge scores and higher attitude-intention congruence indicate a better-informed decision.
Day 1
Subjective Decisional Conflict
Periodo de tiempo: Day 1
Assessed using a standardized Decisional Conflict Scale. This measures the participant's perceived uncertainty in choosing a screening option, their clarity of personal values, and their feeling of being supported in decision-making. Scores are transformed to a 0 to 100 scale. Lower scores indicate less decisional conflict and greater decision certainty.
Day 1
Medical Accuracy and Safety of Generated Information
Periodo de tiempo: Day 1
A quantitative and qualitative assessment of the medical accuracy of the AI-generated texts. This is operationalized by counting the frequency (number of occurrences) and categorizing the severity of deviations from established medical evidence (i.e., misinformation or "hallucinations"). These deviations are identified via an integrated ethics module and/or expert review. Lower frequencies and lower severity ratings indicate higher medical accuracy.
Day 1

Colaboradores e Investigadores

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

Investigadores

  • Investigador principal: Felix G Rebitschek, PhD, Harding Center for Risk Literacy

Publicaciones y enlaces útiles

La persona responsable de ingresar información sobre el estudio proporciona voluntariamente estas publicaciones. Estos pueden ser sobre cualquier cosa relacionada con el 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)

15 de septiembre de 2026

Finalización primaria (Estimado)

30 de septiembre de 2026

Finalización del estudio (Estimado)

30 de septiembre de 2026

Fechas de registro del estudio

Enviado por primera vez

9 de septiembre de 2026

Primero enviado que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad

15 de septiembre de 2026

Publicado por primera vez (Actual)

18 de septiembre de 2026

Actualizaciones de registros de estudio

Última actualización publicada (Actual)

18 de septiembre de 2026

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

15 de septiembre de 2026

Última verificación

1 de septiembre de 2026

Más información

Términos relacionados con este estudio

Plan de datos de participantes individuales (IPD)

¿Planea compartir datos de participantes individuales (IPD)?

SÍ

Descripción del plan IPD

De-identified individual participant data (IPD) underlying the results reported in the published article, including survey data (SDM-Q-9, decisional conflict, knowledge scores) and anonymized dialog transcripts, will be shared.

Marco de tiempo para compartir IPD

Data will become available immediately following publication of the primary results and will be accessible indefinitely.

Criterios de acceso compartido de IPD

Data will be made publicly available as supplement material on the publishers website to any researcher or individual for non-commercial research purposes.

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