ArticleBMC medical education2026
Application of large language models in medical interview training: a study with medical students.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper explores the application of Large Language Models (LLMs) in medical interview training. While medical interviews remain fundamental in healthcare, training methods often require human interaction, limiting practice opportunities. We investigate if LLMs can effectively simulate patients for training purposes. We examined commercially available models and fine-tuned open-source LLMs using QLoRA techniques on a dataset of medical interviews. We developed a web application employing these models and conducted in-depth interviews with medical students to evaluate its effectiveness. Students found the application helpful, rating conversation quality as good and highlighting advantages over traditional training methods, particularly regarding availability and consistency in patient symptom presentation. While students emphasized that LLMs cannot replace real patient interactions, they recognized significant benefits for supplementary training. Our findings confirm that LLMs can be valuable tools in medical interview training, providing opportunities for skill development without dependency on peer availability or scheduled sessions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.