Menu
Not yet recruiting NCT07222644

Clinical Language Evaluation With AI for Residents

No phase Interventional Patient Communication

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: educational LLM-based feedback tool.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Patient Communication. Basic parameters: 18 years — 50 years · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
United States
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →
Official title

Clinical Language Evaluation With AI for Residents (CLEAR2) - A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview

The purpose of this study is to refine and test existing enterprise-grade large language model (LLM) based on generative artificial intelligence (AI), to assess the feasibility and acceptability of LLM-based feedback, to assess the ability of LLM-based feedback to improve residents' communications,to explore the ability of standardized patients to assess residents' communication and to explore the ability of residents to self-assess their communication complexity

Interventions

  • Behavioral educational LLM-based feedback tool
    Participants will have their verbal communications with standardized patients (SP) regarding 3 different scenarios recorded, transcribed, and analyzed in real-time by the large language model (LLM) and will receive feedback as suggestions and alternative scripts. These will be reviewed by residents between SP scenarios

Primary outcome measures

  • Readability discernment as assessed by a survey [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • Quality discernment as assessed by a survey [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • Correctness of recommendations as assessed by a survey [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • Applicability of recommendations as assessed by a survey [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • Perceived readability of resident-standardized patient (SP) interactions as assessed by a survey: schooling level [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • confidence in communication ability [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • usefulness of the LLM [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • acceptability of future use [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
Secondary outcome measures (5)
  • Survey feedback on the LLM interface [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • readability grade level of resident-SP transcripts as assessed by the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) readability tool [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • Quality based on Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) score of resident-SP transcripts [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • Perceived readability of SP-resident interactions as assessed by a standardized survey [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]
  • confidence in communication ability [Time frame: end of intervention ( 1 hour after baseline)]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • McGovern Medical School (MMS) general surgery residents
  • postgraduate year (PGY) 1-5

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: Yes

Study design

Allocation
Randomized
Model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Open label
Primary purpose
Other

Study locations

United States · 1 center
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston — Houston

Identifiers

NCT: NCT07222644 · HSC-MS-25-0920

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗