Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42721453›Full record

Observational studyJMIR formative research2026

Feasibility of AI and Human Standardized Patients to Enhance Customer Discovery Communication Skills in Medical Students: Preliminary Evaluation of an Observational Cohort Study.

Nathaniel Hafer, Monika Chitre, Melissa Fischer, Julie LeMoine

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JMIR formative research, 2026. 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

4 authors.

Nathaniel HaferUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0164-5092
Monika ChitreUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6882-9067
Melissa FischerUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-5594-0360
Julie LeMoineUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5667-8246

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical students must build skills beyond traditional clinical domains to best shape the evolving health care system and fill a variety of professional roles after graduation. AI offers new methods for medical education.

objectiveThis study aimed to develop and evaluate the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of traditional (human) standardized patient (SP) engagement and generative AI (GenAI)-generated SP engagement as a low-stakes way for students to practice customer discovery interviews.

methodsAn interactive classroom experience was created in the UMass Chan Medical School interprofessional Center for Experiential Learning and Simulation (iCELS) using an observational cohort design to simulate 2 different interview scenarios with human SPs and AI-generated SPs. The simulation with human SPs was conducted with 74 first-year medical students in the Entrepreneurship, Biodesign, and Innovation Pathway starting in 2023. In 2026, 2 GenAI chatbot interview agents, using OpenAI GPT-5.2, were developed and added as an additional part of the simulation experience. The 2 scenario-specific GenAI agents (patient and clinician/physician) used structured instructions defining their roles, interview contexts, knowledge boundaries, response styles, time limits, feedback, and scoring rubric. The simulations took place over a single 2-hour session in the spring semester. Interview scenarios, sample questions and answers, and an evaluation rubric were developed for both SPs to promote consistency. Primary outcomes were student attitudes regarding the acceptability of the simulation and self-efficacy, collected via a validated online survey immediately after class. Students were asked to rate statements on a 3-point (1="not at all relevant," 2="somewhat relevant," and 3="very relevant"), 4-point (1="strongly disagree" to 4="strongly agree"), or 5-point (1="strongly disagree," 3="neutral," and 5="strongly agree") Likert scale and were also allowed to provide open-ended comments.

resultsThe students gave the simulation with human SPs high scores, with 85% (23/27) agreeing or strongly agreeing that the exercise met learning objectives, with a median score of 4 (IQR 1) on a 4-point Likert scale. Responses to the AI chatbot session had a bimodal distribution; for example, 65% (13/20) of students agreed that "This experience with an AI chatbot SP helped me practice my customer discovery interview skills" while 35% (7/20) disagreed with this statement. A Mann-Whitney U test compared responses between the human SP and AI chatbot groups and revealed no significant difference in responses.

conclusionsThis preliminary study with an AI chatbot was able to replicate realistic customer discovery interviews in 2 different scenarios. Larger studies are needed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of these chatbots for practicing customer discovery skills. Future work will create transcripts of both the AI chatbot and human SP interviews and use independent raters to score interview quality based on our scoring rubric. Finally, we plan to enhance the chatbots to provide a more immersive and realistic experience for students.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCommunicationPatient SimulationStudents, MedicalAdultCohort StudiesFeasibility StudiesFemaleGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansMaleacademic successAIartificial intelligenceentrepreneurshipGenAIgenerative artificial intelligenceI-corpsinterviewsimulation trainingundergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID42721453
PMCPMC13613044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.