ArticleJMIR medical education2026
AI-Mediated Assessment of Continuing Medical Education: The Case-based Learning Intelligence Credit System (CLICS) Framework.
Article in JMIR 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlabelled: Continuing medical education (CME) and continuing professional development (CPD) systems have traditionally relied on time-based credit allocation, using participation duration as a proxy for professional learning. Although administratively simple and scalable, this model does not reliably demonstrate whether physicians have engaged in meaningful learning, improved clinical reasoning, or critically appraised evidence. The emergence of generative AI creates an opportunity to rethink how physician learning is documented, assessed, and credited. This viewpoint proposes the Case-based Learning Intelligence Credit System (CLICS), a conceptual framework for translating AI-mediated clinical learning interactions into auditable evidence of reasoning-related engagement that could support CME/CPD credit. CLICS introduces the professional learning episode (PLE) as the basic unit of creditable learning: a coherent AI-mediated interaction demonstrating a clinically meaningful problem, reasoning development through iterative inquiry, contextual or evidentiary integration, and reflective synthesis. PLEs are evaluated using the proposed Practice Intelligence Score-7 (PIS-7) rubric, subject to human calibration and oversight; the rubric assesses observable reasoning behavior within the episode rather than the AI's answer, and qualifying PLEs may be translated into CME/CPD credit through threshold-based, human-auditable conversion rules. CLICS is not intended to replace traditional CME but to extend it as an optional, evidence-generating pathway for personalized, practice-embedded professional development. Its implementation requires iterative validation, stratified human audit, privacy-by-design architecture, antigaming controls, bias monitoring, and professional oversight. If validated, CLICS may enable identification of domain-specific areas for improvement and support personalized, adaptive learning pathways.
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.