Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40702721›Full record

Trial reportJMIR formative research2025

Feasibility of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Large AI-Based Linguistic Models for Clinical Reasoning Training of Physical Therapy Students: Pilot Randomized Parallel-Group Study.

Raúl Ferrer-Peña, Silvia Di-Bonaventura, Alberto Pérez-González, Alfredo Lerín-Calvo

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Raúl Ferrer-PeñaGrupo de Investigación Clínico-Docente sobre Ciencias de la Rehabilitación (INDOCLIN), Centro Superior de Estudios Universitarios La Salle, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, La Salle 10, Aravaca, Madrid, 28023, Spain, 34 917401980.ORCID 0000-0001-5495-8458
Silvia Di-BonaventuraGrupo de Investigación Clínico-Docente sobre Ciencias de la Rehabilitación (INDOCLIN), Centro Superior de Estudios Universitarios La Salle, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, La Salle 10, Aravaca, Madrid, 28023, Spain, 34 917401980.ORCID 0000-0003-0564-9557
Alberto Pérez-GonzálezGrupo de Investigación Clínico-Docente sobre Ciencias de la Rehabilitación (INDOCLIN), Centro Superior de Estudios Universitarios La Salle, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, La Salle 10, Aravaca, Madrid, 28023, Spain, 34 917401980.ORCID 0009-0003-9892-768X
Alfredo Lerín-CalvoGrupo de Investigación Clínico-Docente sobre Ciencias de la Rehabilitación (INDOCLIN), Centro Superior de Estudios Universitarios La Salle, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, La Salle 10, Aravaca, Madrid, 28023, Spain, 34 917401980.ORCID 0000-0002-7337-8747

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Clinical reasoning is a critical skill for physical therapists, involving the collection and interpretation of patient information to form accurate diagnoses. Traditional training often lacks the diversity of clinical cases necessary for students to develop these skills comprehensively. Large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4 have the potential to simulate a wide range of clinical scenarios, offering a novel approach to enhance clinical reasoning in physical therapy education. Objective: The aim of the study is to explore the main barriers and facilitators that could be encountered in conducting a randomized clinical trial to study the effectiveness of the implementation of LLM models as tools to work on the clinical reasoning of physical therapy students. Methods: This pilot randomized parallel-group study involved 46 third-year physical therapy students at La Salle Centre for Higher University Studies. Participants were randomly assigned to either the experimental group, which received LLM training, or the control group, which followed the usual curriculum. The intervention lasted for 4 weeks, during which the experimental group used LLM to solve weekly clinical cases. Digital competencies, satisfaction, and costs were evaluated to explore the feasibility of this intervention. Results: The recruitment and participation rates were high, but active engagement with the LLM was low, with only 5.75% (5/23) of the experimental group actively using the model. No significant difference in overall satisfaction was found between the groups, and the cost analysis reflected an initial cost of US $1738 for completing the study. Conclusions: While LLMs have the potential to enhance specific digital competencies in physical therapy students, their practical integration into the curriculum faces challenges. Future studies should focus on improving student engagement with LLMs and extending the training period to determine the feasibility of integrating this tool into physical therapy education and maximize benefits.

Indexed as

Clinical ReasoningLinguisticsPhysical Therapy SpecialtyAdultCurriculumFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMalePilot ProjectsYoung Adultartificial intelligenceartificial intelligence-basedbarriersclinical reasoningcritical skilleffectivenessfacilitatorfeasibilityimplementationlarge language modelslinguistic modelLLMphysical therapyphysical therapy educationphysical therapy studentphysiotherapypilot studyrandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID40702721
PMCPMC12329153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.