ClinicalNCT07891325
Generative AI-Assisted Teaching and Clinical Reasoning Among TCM Interns
A study testing GAI-Assisted Clinical Education and Conventional Clinical Education in people with Clinical and Education, run by Taipei City Hospital at 1 site in Taiwan.
Trial summary
This study evaluated the effects of generative artificial intelligence (GAI)-assisted education on clinical reasoning performance among traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) interns. An assessor-blinded, nonrandomized, cluster-controlled educational intervention study was conducted at three hospital branches in Taiwan. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- What is being tested?
- GAI-Assisted Clinical Education and Conventional Clinical Education
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 38 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTaiwan
- Study dates
- 20 Feb 2024to 30 May 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Aged 18 years or older.
- Enrolled in an undergraduate or postbaccalaureate traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) program.
- Completed the required TCM coursework and the first stage of the national TCM licensing examination.
- Provided informed consent to participate in the study.
Who cannot join
- Already licensed as a traditional Chinese medicine physician.
- Unable to complete the required study procedures.
- Declined to provide informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Generative AI-Assisted Teaching and Clinical Reasoning Performance Among Traditional Chinese Medicine Interns: A Pilot Controlled Study
This study evaluated the effects of generative artificial intelligence (GAI)-assisted education on clinical reasoning performance among traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) interns.
An assessor-blinded, nonrandomized, cluster-controlled educational intervention study was conducted at three hospital branches in Taiwan. Participants were assigned to either a GAI-assisted education group or a conventional education group according to their clinical training sites.
Read more
The intervention group received a three-hour introductory training session on ChatGPT and was encouraged to use the tool independently for clinical case analysis during subsequent clinical rotations. The control group received conventional clinical education without structured GAI-assisted training.
The primary outcome was clinical reasoning performance, assessed through clinical case reports independently evaluated by two blinded TCM educators. Secondary outcomes included perceptions of the four-element TCM diagnostic framework and perceptions of GAI-assisted learning.
Read the detailed description
This study investigated whether incorporating generative artificial intelligence (GAI) into traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) clinical education could improve clinical reasoning performance among TCM interns.
The study employed an assessor-blinded, nonrandomized, cluster-controlled design across three hospital branches in Taiwan. Participants were allocated to the intervention or control group according to their clinical training sites rather than through individual randomization.
Participants in the intervention group attended a three-hour introductory session covering the use of ChatGPT for TCM clinical case analysis, including disease location, etiology, disease nature, pathogenesis, differential diagnosis, and prescription decision-making. Following this session, participants could independently use ChatGPT during clinical rotations without a prescribed minimum frequency or duration.
Participants in the control group continued conventional clinical education, including clinical observation, case discussions, and instruction from supervising physicians, without structured GAI-assisted training.
Clinical reasoning performance was assessed before and after the educational intervention using written clinical case reports. Two independent TCM educators, blinded to group allocation, evaluated the reports across ten domains using a 10-point scoring scale for each domain. Total scores ranged from 10 to 100, with higher scores indicating better clinical reasoning performance.
Secondary outcomes included participants' perceptions of the four-element TCM diagnostic framework, assessed using an 11-item questionnaire with a seven-point Likert scale. Participants in the intervention group also completed a 12-item questionnaire using a five-point Likert scale to assess their perceptions of and satisfaction with GAI-assisted learning.
The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Taipei City Hospital (TCHIRB-11210001), and informed consent was obtained from participating interns.
- Being tested
- GAI-Assisted Clinical Education, Conventional Clinical Education
- Keywords
- Generative Artificial Intelligence, ChatGPT, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Clinical Reasoning, Medical Education
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
GAI-Assisted Clinical EducationBehavioural
A structured three-hour introductory training session was provided on the use of ChatGPT for traditional Chinese medicine clinical reasoning and case analysis. Training included demonstrations of disease location, etiology, disease nature, pathogenesis, differential diagnosis, and prescription decision-making. Participants subsequently used ChatGPT independently during clinical rotations as needed. No minimum frequency or duration of ChatGPT use was required.
Conventional Clinical EducationBehavioural
Participants continued routine traditional Chinese medicine clinical training, including supervised clinical observation, case-based discussions, and instruction from supervising physicians. No structured training in or assigned use of generative artificial intelligence tools was provided.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| GAI-Assisted Education | Experimental | Participants received a three-hour introductory training session on the use of ChatGPT for traditional Chinese medicine clinical case analysis. Following the training, participants were allowed to use ChatGPT independently during clinical rotations without a prescribed minimum frequency or duration of use. Receives: Behavioral: GAI-Assisted Clinical Education |
| Conventional Clinical Education | Active comparator | Participants received conventional traditional Chinese medicine clinical education, including clinical observation, case discussions, and instruction from supervising physicians, without structured generative AI-assisted training. Receives: Behavioral: Conventional Clinical Education |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Clinical Reasoning Performance Score
Clinical reasoning performance was assessed using written clinical case reports independently evaluated by two blinded traditional Chinese medicine educators. Ten domains were scored from 1 to 10, including disease location, etiology, disease nature, pathogenesis, differential diagnosis, prescription selection, pathophysiological reasoning, overall clinical decision-making, information analysis, and clinical applicability of prescriptions. Total scores ranged from 10 to 100, with higher scores indicating better clinical reasoning performance. The mean score from the two evaluators was used for analysis. Changes in scores from baseline (Month 0) to post-intervention (Month 3) were compared between groups.
Measured: Baseline (Month 0) and post-intervention (Month 3)
Secondary outcomes (2)
Change in Perceptions of the Four Elements of TCM Etiology and Pathogenesis
Participants' perceptions of the four-element traditional Chinese medicine diagnostic framework were assessed using an investigator-developed 11-item questionnaire with a seven-point Likert scale. The questionnaire was administered before and after the educational intervention in both groups. Responses were collected anonymously and could not be matched at the individual level across time points. Group-level changes in questionnaire responses were evaluated.
Measured: Baseline (Month 0) and post-intervention (Month 3)
Change in Perceptions of and Satisfaction With GAI-Assisted Learning
Perceptions of and satisfaction with generative AI-assisted learning were evaluated among participants in the intervention group using an investigator-developed 12-item questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale. The questionnaire was administered at baseline (Month 0) and post-intervention (Month 3). Responses were collected anonymously and could not be linked at the individual level across assessment points. Changes in questionnaire responses were therefore evaluated at the group level.
Measured: Baseline (Month 0) and post-intervention (Month 3)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Oct 2026
- Study start20 Feb 2024
- Primary completion2 Dec 2024
- Study completion30 May 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for ClinicalStudies 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Participants were assigned to the intervention or control group according to their clinical training sites. One hospital branch received generative AI-assisted education, while two hospital branches continued conventional clinical education. Individual randomization was not performed.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 38 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Taipei City Hospital
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ming-Jen Wang, MD, Taipei City Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07891325
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- TCHIRB-11210001
- Other IDs
- TPCH-114-25
- Status last verified
- Oct 2026
- First submitted
- 15 Oct 2026
- Last updated
- 23 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual participant data will not be publicly shared because the study involves educational assessment records and questionnaire responses from a relatively small cohort of medical interns. Data confidentiality and participant privacy will be maintained in accordance with the approved institutional review board protocol.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Generative AI-Assisted Teaching and Clinical Reasoning Performance Among Traditional Chinese Medicine Interns: A Pilot Controlled Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07891325
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TCHIRB-11210001
- Keywords
- Generative Artificial Intelligence, ChatGPT, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Clinical Reasoning, Medical Education
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 38 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Taipei City HospitalOther government
- Study start
- 20 Feb 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 2 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 May 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Oct 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 study evaluated the effects of generative artificial intelligence (GAI)-assisted education on clinical reasoning performance among traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) interns.
An assessor-blinded, nonrandomized, cluster-controlled educational intervention study was conducted at three hospital branches in Taiwan. Participants were assigned to either a GAI-assisted education group or a conventional education group according to their clinical training sites.
The intervention group received a three-hour introductory training session on ChatGPT and was encouraged to use the tool independently for clinical case analysis during subsequent clinical rotations. The control group received conventional clinical education without structured GAI-assisted training.
The primary outcome was clinical reasoning performance, assessed through clinical case reports independently evaluated by two blinded TCM educators. Secondary outcomes included perceptions of the four-element TCM diagnostic framework and perceptions of GAI-assisted learning.
Detailed description
This study investigated whether incorporating generative artificial intelligence (GAI) into traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) clinical education could improve clinical reasoning performance among TCM interns.
The study employed an assessor-blinded, nonrandomized, cluster-controlled design across three hospital branches in Taiwan. Participants were allocated to the intervention or control group according to their clinical training sites rather than through individual randomization.
Participants in the intervention group attended a three-hour introductory session covering the use of ChatGPT for TCM clinical case analysis, including disease location, etiology, disease nature, pathogenesis, differential diagnosis, and prescription decision-making. Following this session, participants could independently use ChatGPT during clinical rotations without a prescribed minimum frequency or duration.
Participants in the control group continued conventional clinical education, including clinical observation, case discussions, and instruction from supervising physicians, without structured GAI-assisted training.
Clinical reasoning performance was assessed before and after the educational intervention using written clinical case reports. Two independent TCM educators, blinded to group allocation, evaluated the reports across ten domains using a 10-point scoring scale for each domain. Total scores ranged from 10 to 100, with higher scores indicating better clinical reasoning performance.
Secondary outcomes included participants' perceptions of the four-element TCM diagnostic framework, assessed using an 11-item questionnaire with a seven-point Likert scale. Participants in the intervention group also completed a 12-item questionnaire using a five-point Likert scale to assess their perceptions of and satisfaction with GAI-assisted learning.
The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Taipei City Hospital (TCHIRB-11210001), and informed consent was obtained from participating interns.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Participants were assigned to the intervention or control group according to their clinical training sites. One hospital branch received generative AI-assisted education, while two hospital branches continued conventional clinical education. Individual randomization was not performed.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| GAI-Assisted Education | Experimental | Behavioral: GAI-Assisted Clinical EducationParticipants received a three-hour introductory training session on the use of ChatGPT for traditional Chinese medicine clinical case analysis. Following the training, participants were allowed to use ChatGPT independently during clinical rotations without a prescribed minimum frequency or duration of use. |
| Conventional Clinical Education | Active comparator | Behavioral: Conventional Clinical EducationParticipants received conventional traditional Chinese medicine clinical education, including clinical observation, case discussions, and instruction from supervising physicians, without structured generative AI-assisted training. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Aged 18 years or older.
- Enrolled in an undergraduate or postbaccalaureate traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) program.
- Completed the required TCM coursework and the first stage of the national TCM licensing examination.
- Provided informed consent to participate in the study.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Already licensed as a traditional Chinese medicine physician.
- Unable to complete the required study procedures.
- Declined to provide informed consent.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| GAI-Assisted Clinical EducationA structured three-hour introductory training session was provided on the use of ChatGPT for traditional Chinese medicine clinical reasoning and case analysis. Training included demonstrations of disease location, etiology, disease nature, pathogenesis, differential diagnosis, and prescription decision-making. Participants subsequently used ChatGPT independently during clinical rotations as needed. No minimum frequency or duration of ChatGPT use was required. | Behavioural | GAI-Assisted Education |
| Conventional Clinical EducationParticipants continued routine traditional Chinese medicine clinical training, including supervised clinical observation, case-based discussions, and instruction from supervising physicians. No structured training in or assigned use of generative artificial intelligence tools was provided. | Behavioural | Conventional Clinical Education |
Primary outcome
Change in Clinical Reasoning Performance Score
Time frame: Baseline (Month 0) and post-intervention (Month 3)
Clinical reasoning performance was assessed using written clinical case reports independently evaluated by two blinded traditional Chinese medicine educators. Ten domains were scored from 1 to 10, including disease location, etiology, disease nature, pathogenesis, differential diagnosis, prescription selection, pathophysiological reasoning, overall clinical decision-making, information analysis, and clinical applicability of prescriptions. Total scores ranged from 10 to 100, with higher scores indicating better clinical reasoning performance. The mean score from the two evaluators was used for analysis. Changes in scores from baseline (Month 0) to post-intervention (Month 3) were compared between groups.
2 secondary outcomes
Change in Perceptions of the Four Elements of TCM Etiology and Pathogenesis
Time frame: Baseline (Month 0) and post-intervention (Month 3)
Change in Perceptions of and Satisfaction With GAI-Assisted Learning
Time frame: Baseline (Month 0) and post-intervention (Month 3)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Oct 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual participant data will not be publicly shared because the study involves educational assessment records and questionnaire responses from a relatively small cohort of medical interns. Data confidentiality and participant privacy will be maintained in accordance with the approved institutional review board protocol.
Related trials for Clinical
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Validation of the Healthcare Relationship Assessment Scale (ERA) in Health Sciences Students.
Health Adult Subjects, Communication
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Study of INBRX-106 and INBRX-106 in Combination With Pembrolizumab (Keytruda®) in Subjects With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors (Hexavalent OX40 Agonist)
Solid Tumor, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly SHR-3167 Compared With Once-Daily Insulin Glargine in Adults With Insulin-Naive Type 2 Diabetes
Type 2 Diabetes
Recruiting
Unified Protocol in Penitentiary Facilities
Depression Disorders, Anxiety
Recruiting
Safety and Performance of UCon Patch Electrode
Urinary Incontinence, Urinary Incontinence, Urge
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. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing GAI-Assisted Clinical Education and Conventional Clinical Education in people with Clinical and Education, run by Taipei City Hospital at 1 site in Taiwan.
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 4 inclusion and 3 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Oct 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 Taiwan. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Clinical Reasoning Performance Score (time frame: Baseline (Month 0) and post-intervention (Month 3)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 23 Oct 2026.