Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42558094›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical extended reality

A Conversational Ethics Bot (CALEB) Versus GPT-4o for Medical Ethics Education: Transcript Analysis and Extended Reality Feasibility Study.

Rohan Jotwani, Vansh D Barot, Peter A Goldstein, Alexandros Sigaras, Sandhya Sriram, Robert S White, Debjani Mukherjee, Ezra Gabbay, June M Chan, Julia Steigerwald Schnall and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical extended reality. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Rohan JotwaniDepartment of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7605-1312
Vansh D BarotSchool of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-1731-3836
Peter A GoldsteinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Alexandros SigarasEnglander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Sandhya SriramEnglander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Robert S WhiteDepartment of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Debjani MukherjeeDepartment of Medicine, Division of Medical Ethics, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Ezra GabbayDepartment of Medicine, Division of Medical Ethics, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
June M ChanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Julia Steigerwald SchnallCollege of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
John E RubinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ethics education in medical training remains difficult to standardize and sustain. Many curricula still rely heavily on didactic teaching rather than immersive ethical reasoning. Although large language models (LLMs) can generate structured analyses of ethical dilemmas, they are not designed to facilitate embodied, conversational engagement that mirrors real-world ethics discussions. We developed CALEB (Conversational Agent Learning Ethics Bot), a domain-specific, extended reality (XR)-enabled conversational agent designed to simulate pragmatic, case-based moral deliberation. CALEB integrates a curated medical ethics knowledge base, structured persona design, and bounded generative architecture to promote focused, dialogical interaction. We conducted a two-phase feasibility evaluation. In phase 1, CALEB and GPT-4o accessed through the ChatGPT interface were compared using standardized transcript outputs generated from matched medical ethics prompts. In phase 2, medical ethicists interacted with CALEB in a live XR setting and provided formative post-session feedback. GPT-4o generated substantially longer and comprehensive responses. In contrast, CALEB produced significantly shorter but more principle-dense responses and was the only system to consistently demonstrate first-person and emotionally interpretive language. Computational analysis revealed higher empathy scores for CALEB in interpretive dimensions (

Indexed as

AI agents < artificial intelligence in MXRand adverse effects of MXRartificial intelligence in MXRethicsprivacysafetyXR for medical or surgical training and educationXR for patient education and communication

Identifiers

PMID42558094
PMCPMC13396201

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.