ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Development and application of an intelligent assessment system for medical clinical skill training.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The digital transformation of medical education represents a significant global development trend. However, clinical skill assessment, a vital method to inspect education outcome, has historically depended on conventional manual evaluation methods. To further explore intelligent training paradigms and realize autonomous instruction and automated assessment, this study introduces contrastive learning methods to construct a novel clinical skill assessment system characterized by unified standard, visible process, and objective evaluation. Practical validation indicates that the model effectively differentiates varying levels of proficiency in the specific surgical procedures. Under the optimal parameter combination, the prediction of one operational procedure achieved a peak accuracy of 94.01%. With a one-point tolerance, accuracy further improved to 96.41%. Overall, depending on its objectivity and standardization, the model significantly enhances the scientific rigor and efficiency of the clinical skill training process, while also providing immediate feedback on performance.
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.