Healthy AdultNCT07833293
Effectiveness of AI-Assisted Antibiotic Prescribing
A study testing ChatGPT in people with Healthy Adult, run by Lahore University of Management Sciences at 1 site in Pakistan.
Trial summary
This randomized controlled trial aims to evaluate the impact of providing LLM access to physicians on antibiotic prescribing appropriateness, using a composite outcome instrument, the Antibiotic Prescribing Appropriateness Score (APAS), that simultaneously evaluates antibiotic selection, dosing, duration, clinical… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy Adult
- What is being tested?
- ChatGPT
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 50 participants
- Where
- 1 sitePakistan
- Study dates
- Sep 2026to Dec 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Completed Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) or equivalent degree. The equivalent degree of MBBS in the US and Canada is Doctor of Medicine (MD).
- Full or Provisionally Registered Medical Practitioners with the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (PMDC).
Who cannot join
- Any other Registered Medical Practitioner (Full or Provisional) with PMDC not holding an MBBS or equivalent degree (e.g., practitioners with a Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS)).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Pakistan1 site
Lahore University of Management Sciences
Lahore, Punjab Province, 54792
Main Contact, +92 42 3560 8000 ext. 2153, lli@lums.edu.pk
About this study
Official title: Effectiveness of AI-Assisted Antibiotic Prescribing: A Randomized Controlled Trial
This randomized controlled trial aims to evaluate the impact of providing LLM access to physicians on antibiotic prescribing appropriateness, using a composite outcome instrument, the Antibiotic Prescribing Appropriateness Score (APAS), that simultaneously evaluates antibiotic selection, dosing, duration, clinical reasoning, and management planning. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: the intervention group will have access to an LLM alongside conventional resources, while the control group will use conventional resources only (e.g. UpToDate, PubMed and Google Search with AI features disabled). Both groups will respond to a set of clinical vignettes covering common infectious disease scenarios requiring antibiotic prescribing decisions, with responses evaluated using an expert-validated grading rubric and independently scored by blinded raters.
Read the detailed description
Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing remains one of the most consequential drivers of antimicrobial resistance globally, with particular urgency in low- and middle-income countries, where regulatory enforcement, antibiogram coverage, and specialist infectious-disease support are limited. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in supporting clinical decision-making. LLMs have been explored as tools for synthesizing antibiotic recommendations and flagging spectrum mismatches. Yet LLMs may produce confident but incorrect recommendations, and their use may reduce the quality of physicians' own clinical reasoning through over-reliance. Whether this promise translates into measurably better antibiotic prescribing behavior among practising physicians, measured across the full spectrum of selection, dosing, and clinical reasoning, has not been rigorously evaluated in a randomized, controlled setting.
This study evaluates whether access to an LLM affects the Antibiotic Prescribing Appropriateness Score (APAS) among licensed physicians in Pakistan. Secondary objectives include assessing whether the intervention improves antibiotic selection and spectrum-matching, whether the effect differs by physician clinical experience, and whether LLM access affects the time physicians spend per vignette.
This study will be an assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial with two arms. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the intervention or control arm in a 1:1 ratio. Outcome assessors (those scoring the APAS responses) will be blinded to participants' group assignments and will evaluate vignette responses without knowledge of which arm the responding physician was in. Each participant is expected to complete 6-10 vignettes in a single, proctored, 75-minute session. The order of vignettes will be randomized independently for each participant to control for order effects. The time spent on each vignette will be automatically recorded.
In the intervention arm, participants will have access to ChatGPT in addition to conventional diagnostic and reference resources (UpToDate, PubMed, Google search with AI features disabled). In the control arm, participants will use conventional resources only (UpToDate, PubMed, Google Search with AI features disabled). Both arms will evaluate the same set of clinical vignettes.
Participants will be presented with clinical vignettes covering common infectious disease scenarios requiring antibiotic prescribing decisions. Vignettes will be sourced and modified based on clinically realistic cases relevant to the target population, and will follow a standardized format, including the patient's chief complaint and history of present illness, and physical examination findings.
Vignettes will cover a range of infectious disease presentations encountered in family medicine, general practice, internal medicine, and emergency medicine, avoid overly rare or highly specialized conditions, and reflect a range of prescribing decisions, including empiric treatment, culture-directed de-escalation, spectrum selection, dosing decisions, and stewardship-sensitive presentations in which withholding antibiotics may be the clinically correct decision, to avoid reward bias toward prescribing. All vignettes will be developed by an independent expert panel, and each vignette will be accompanied by an expert-validated grading rubric specifying expected answers for antibiotic selection, dosing, route, and duration, clinical reasoning, and management planning.
The primary measure of prescribing appropriateness will be the APAS, a four-domain rubric scored out of 10 points per vignette and expressed as a percentage. The adjusted mean difference in vignette-level APAS between the intervention and control arms is the primary outcome of our study. Responses will be independently evaluated by three qualified raters blinded to participant identity and treatment assignment. The arithmetic mean of the three raters' total scores will constitute the vignette-level APAS used in the primary analysis.
- Conditions
- Healthy Adult
- Being tested
- ChatGPT
- Keywords
- antibiotic prescribing, antimicrobial resistance, clinical reasoning, large language model
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
ChatGPTOther
Participants in the intervention arm will have access to ChatGPT in addition to conventional diagnostic and reference resources.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention Arm | Active comparator | Participants will have access to ChatGPT in addition to conventional diagnostic and reference resources (UpToDate, PubMed, Google search with AI features disabled). They will evaluate the same set of clinical vignettes covering common infectious disease scenarios requiring antibiotic prescribing decisions, with vignette order randomized independently for each participant. Receives: Other: ChatGPT |
| Control Arm | No intervention | Participants will use conventional resources only (UpToDate, PubMed, Google Search with AI features disabled). They will evaluate the same set of clinical vignettes presented in a randomized order. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Antibiotic Prescribing Appropriateness Score (APAS)
The primary outcome will be the composite score (expressed as a percentage) based on an expert-validated rubric that evaluates physician responses across four domains for each clinical vignette: Antibiotic Selection \& Spectrum (0-6 points), Dosing, Route \& Duration (0-3 points), Clinical Reasoning (0-2 points), and Management Plan (0-2 points). The total score for each vignette is the sum of scores across the four domains (maximum 13 points). APAS is expressed as a percentage, calculated as the total score divided by 13, multiplied by 100. The primary endpoint is vignette-level APAS. Responses will be independently evaluated by three licenses physicians blinded to participant identity and treatment assignment. The arithmetic mean of the three raters' total scores will constitute the vignette-level APAS used in the primary analysis.
Measured: Assessed at a single time point for each case, during the scheduled diagnostic reasoning evaluation session, which takes place between 0-6 days after participant enrollment.
Secondary outcomes (2)
Antibiotic Selection, Spectrum & Dosing Subscore
The antibiotic selection, spectrum, and dosing elements of APAS (0-6 points per vignette, expressed as a percentage), scored using the same rubric as the primary outcome.
Measured: Assessed at a single time point for each case, during the scheduled diagnostic reasoning evaluation session, which takes place between 0-6 days after participant enrollment.
Time per Vignette
We will compare how much time (in seconds) participants spend per case between the two study arms.
Measured: Assessed at a single time point for each case, during the scheduled diagnostic reasoning evaluation session, which takes place between 0-6 days after participant enrollment.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Sep 2026
- Study startSep 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completionDec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completionDec 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Healthy AdultStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This study will be an assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Lahore University of Management Sciences
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ihsan Ayyub Qazi, PhD, Lahore University of Management Sciences
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07833293
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- LUMS-IRB-0492
- Status last verified
- Sep 2026
- First submitted
- 16 Sep 2026
- Last updated
- 22 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Qazi, I.A., Ali, A., Khawaja, A.U. et al. Large language model diagnostic assistance for physicians in a lower-middle-income country: a randomized controlled trial. Nat. Health 1, 198-205 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44360-025-00007-8
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effectiveness of AI-Assisted Antibiotic Prescribing: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07833293
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LUMS-IRB-0492
- Conditions
- Healthy Adult
- Keywords
- antibiotic prescribing, antimicrobial resistance, clinical reasoning, large language model
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Lahore University of Management SciencesUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
- Study start
- Sep 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Dec 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 22 Sep 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This randomized controlled trial aims to evaluate the impact of providing LLM access to physicians on antibiotic prescribing appropriateness, using a composite outcome instrument, the Antibiotic Prescribing Appropriateness Score (APAS), that simultaneously evaluates antibiotic selection, dosing, duration, clinical reasoning, and management planning. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: the intervention group will have access to an LLM alongside conventional resources, while the control group will use conventional resources only (e.g. UpToDate, PubMed and Google Search with AI features disabled). Both groups will respond to a set of clinical vignettes covering common infectious disease scenarios requiring antibiotic prescribing decisions, with responses evaluated using an expert-validated grading rubric and independently scored by blinded raters.
Detailed description
Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing remains one of the most consequential drivers of antimicrobial resistance globally, with particular urgency in low- and middle-income countries, where regulatory enforcement, antibiogram coverage, and specialist infectious-disease support are limited. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in supporting clinical decision-making. LLMs have been explored as tools for synthesizing antibiotic recommendations and flagging spectrum mismatches. Yet LLMs may produce confident but incorrect recommendations, and their use may reduce the quality of physicians' own clinical reasoning through over-reliance. Whether this promise translates into measurably better antibiotic prescribing behavior among practising physicians, measured across the full spectrum of selection, dosing, and clinical reasoning, has not been rigorously evaluated in a randomized, controlled setting.
This study evaluates whether access to an LLM affects the Antibiotic Prescribing Appropriateness Score (APAS) among licensed physicians in Pakistan. Secondary objectives include assessing whether the intervention improves antibiotic selection and spectrum-matching, whether the effect differs by physician clinical experience, and whether LLM access affects the time physicians spend per vignette.
This study will be an assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial with two arms. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the intervention or control arm in a 1:1 ratio. Outcome assessors (those scoring the APAS responses) will be blinded to participants' group assignments and will evaluate vignette responses without knowledge of which arm the responding physician was in. Each participant is expected to complete 6-10 vignettes in a single, proctored, 75-minute session. The order of vignettes will be randomized independently for each participant to control for order effects. The time spent on each vignette will be automatically recorded.
In the intervention arm, participants will have access to ChatGPT in addition to conventional diagnostic and reference resources (UpToDate, PubMed, Google search with AI features disabled). In the control arm, participants will use conventional resources only (UpToDate, PubMed, Google Search with AI features disabled). Both arms will evaluate the same set of clinical vignettes.
Participants will be presented with clinical vignettes covering common infectious disease scenarios requiring antibiotic prescribing decisions. Vignettes will be sourced and modified based on clinically realistic cases relevant to the target population, and will follow a standardized format, including the patient's chief complaint and history of present illness, and physical examination findings.
Vignettes will cover a range of infectious disease presentations encountered in family medicine, general practice, internal medicine, and emergency medicine, avoid overly rare or highly specialized conditions, and reflect a range of prescribing decisions, including empiric treatment, culture-directed de-escalation, spectrum selection, dosing decisions, and stewardship-sensitive presentations in which withholding antibiotics may be the clinically correct decision, to avoid reward bias toward prescribing. All vignettes will be developed by an independent expert panel, and each vignette will be accompanied by an expert-validated grading rubric specifying expected answers for antibiotic selection, dosing, route, and duration, clinical reasoning, and management planning.
The primary measure of prescribing appropriateness will be the APAS, a four-domain rubric scored out of 10 points per vignette and expressed as a percentage. The adjusted mean difference in vignette-level APAS between the intervention and control arms is the primary outcome of our study. Responses will be independently evaluated by three qualified raters blinded to participant identity and treatment assignment. The arithmetic mean of the three raters' total scores will constitute the vignette-level APAS used in the primary analysis.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This study will be an assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention Arm | Active comparator | Other: ChatGPTParticipants will have access to ChatGPT in addition to conventional diagnostic and reference resources (UpToDate, PubMed, Google search with AI features disabled). They will evaluate the same set of clinical vignettes covering common infectious disease scenarios requiring antibiotic prescribing decisions, with vignette order randomized independently for each participant. |
| Control Arm | No intervention | –Participants will use conventional resources only (UpToDate, PubMed, Google Search with AI features disabled). They will evaluate the same set of clinical vignettes presented in a randomized order. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Completed Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) or equivalent degree. The equivalent degree of MBBS in the US and Canada is Doctor of Medicine (MD).
- Full or Provisionally Registered Medical Practitioners with the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (PMDC).
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Any other Registered Medical Practitioner (Full or Provisional) with PMDC not holding an MBBS or equivalent degree (e.g., practitioners with a Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS)).
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| ChatGPTParticipants in the intervention arm will have access to ChatGPT in addition to conventional diagnostic and reference resources. | Other | Intervention Arm |
Primary outcome
Antibiotic Prescribing Appropriateness Score (APAS)
Time frame: Assessed at a single time point for each case, during the scheduled diagnostic reasoning evaluation session, which takes place between 0-6 days after participant enrollment.
The primary outcome will be the composite score (expressed as a percentage) based on an expert-validated rubric that evaluates physician responses across four domains for each clinical vignette: Antibiotic Selection \& Spectrum (0-6 points), Dosing, Route \& Duration (0-3 points), Clinical Reasoning (0-2 points), and Management Plan (0-2 points). The total score for each vignette is the sum of scores across the four domains (maximum 13 points). APAS is expressed as a percentage, calculated as the total score divided by 13, multiplied by 100. The primary endpoint is vignette-level APAS. Responses will be independently evaluated by three licenses physicians blinded to participant identity and treatment assignment. The arithmetic mean of the three raters' total scores will constitute the vignette-level APAS used in the primary analysis.
2 secondary outcomes
Antibiotic Selection, Spectrum & Dosing Subscore
Time frame: Assessed at a single time point for each case, during the scheduled diagnostic reasoning evaluation session, which takes place between 0-6 days after participant enrollment.
Time per Vignette
Time frame: Assessed at a single time point for each case, during the scheduled diagnostic reasoning evaluation session, which takes place between 0-6 days after participant enrollment.
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 Sep 2026.
- BackgroundQazi, I.A., Ali, A., Khawaja, A.U. et al. Large language model diagnostic assistance for physicians in a lower-middle-income country: a randomized controlled trial. Nat. Health 1, 198-205 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44360-025-00007-8
Related trials for Healthy Adult
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase I Study of GLR2053 Tablets in Chinese Healthy Adult Participants
Atopic Dermatitis
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
Clinical Trial to Assess the Safety, Tolerability, Reactogenicity, and Immunogenicity of a 10 Valent Human Papillomavirus Virus (10vHPV) Vaccine
Human Papillomavirus Infection
Not yet recruiting
REM Enhancement Sleep Technology for Well-being, Emotion, and Life Lift
Healthy Adult Participants
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Safety and Immunogenicity of Chimeric Hemagglutinin mRNA Vaccine Candidates
Influenza
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing ChatGPT in people with Healthy Adult, run by Lahore University of Management Sciences at 1 site in Pakistan.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Pakistan. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Ihsan Ayyub Qazi (+92 42 35608368, ihsan.qazi@lums.edu.pk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Antibiotic Prescribing Appropriateness Score (APAS) (time frame: Assessed at a single time point for each case, during the scheduled diagnostic reasoning evaluation session, which takes place between 0-6 days after participant enrollment.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07833293, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 Sep 2026.