an Intelligent Teaching Agent for the "Epidemiology" Course of the MBBS ProgramNCT07752160
Research and Application of an AI Agent-Based MBBS Course Assistant
A study testing Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology and General LLM in people with an Intelligent Teaching Agent for the "Epidemiology" Course of the MBBS Program and Students' Critical Thinking, Practical Ability and Learning Outcomes, run by The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
Prior to the quasi-experiment, this study performed semi-structured interviews among Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery(MBBS) undergraduate students from the Belt and Road International Medical College, Zhejiang University. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 16 to 25 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- an Intelligent Teaching Agent for the "Epidemiology" Course of the MBBS Program, Students' Critical Thinking, Practical Ability and Learning Outcomes
- What is being tested?
- Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology and General LLM
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 15 May 2026to 31 Jan 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 16 to 25 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- 1: The undergraduate students of the "Belt and Road Initiative" International Medical School of Zhejiang University who have officially registered for the MBBS program
- 2: Voluntary signing of the informed consent form
Who cannot join
- 1: Having severe mental illnesses (such as severe depression, bipolar disorder, acute phase of schizophrenia), serious physical diseases or cognitive impairments
- 2: Is currently participating in other studies that may affect the outcome indicators of this research
- 3: Have systematically studied or participated in research that is highly similar to this study
- 4: No experience of AI agent learning
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
China1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Zhejiang University International School of Medicine
Yiwu, Zhejiang, 322000
Yibo Wu, 0579-89935056, wuyiboism@zju.edu.cn
About this study
Prior to the quasi-experiment, this study performed semi-structured interviews among Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery(MBBS) undergraduate students from the Belt and Road International Medical College, Zhejiang University. Based on learning science, cognitive load theory and causal inference frameworks, the interview outline focused on system usability, feedback quality, learning reasoning processes, cognitive burden and instructional optimization advice. Each 20-30 minute individual interview was audio-recorded with participants' informed consent and verbatim transcribed for standardized qualitative analysis.
The quasi-experiment recruited no fewer than 60 MBBS students. The sample size was determined by intergroup statistical power analysis to guarantee around 30 participants per group for valid intergroup comparison. All eligible students were randomly assigned into two groups with balanced demographic and academic baseline characteristics. The experimental group (n=30) received structured epidemiological learning assisted by the (Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology) SAGE (Artificial Intelligence)AI agent with professional Socratic cognitive guidance. The control group (n=30) adopted general large language model (LLM)-based learning without systematic thinking intervention. Participants with clinically diagnosed severe mental disorders, cognitive dysfunction or inability to finish the complete research process were excluded. A baseline epidemiological knowledge pre-test confirmed no significant academic differences between the two groups via independent samples t-test, and all participants had no prior experience of AI-assisted medical learning.
Read more
The semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect students' authentic learning experiences, interactive perceptions and cognitive characteristics during the use of SAGE agent and general LLMs, providing qualitative evidence for the iterative optimization of AI teaching tools. All interviewees completed baseline assessments and preliminary AI learning trials, ensuring qualified professional foundation and genuine interactive experience. Conducted by trained researchers, the standardized interviews centered on three core themes: system usability and feedback clarity; AI-induced changes in information extraction, hypothesis formulation and causal inference; and common learning barriers including interactive obstacles, comprehension difficulties, cognitive overload and potential AI over-reliance. Transcribed interview data were analyzed through thematic analysis to summarize typical user experience patterns. Qualitative outcomes were triangulated with quantitative experimental results to revise the SAGE teaching protocol, optimize agent prompt chains and improve the interpretation of experimental findings.
The quasi-experiment consisted of three standardized stages. In the pre-test stage, all participants signed informed consent, completed a 25-item clinical epidemiology knowledge scale, an 11-item reasoning ability test and a demographic questionnaire to establish consistent baseline levels. In the intervention stage, the experimental group received standardized training in confounder identification and causal inference construction in strict accordance with the SAGE teaching protocol. The SAGE agent improved students' advanced epidemiological reasoning ability through continuous multi-round Socratic questioning and targeted cognitive guidance. The control group received equal-duration learning in the same experimental environment, only using conventional search engines and unguided LLMs for basic information retrieval without any cognitive and thinking intervention. All participants submitted screenshots to record their accurate AI tool usage duration after completing learning tasks.
In the post-test stage, all participants finished parallel-version epidemiological knowledge assessments and unified reasoning ability tests. Validated scales were adopted to evaluate students' cognitive load, system usability, learning satisfaction and academic self-confidence. Students' final scores of the Epidemiology course were collected as supplementary indicators of long-term learning effectiveness. Upon the completion of data collection, backend AI interaction logs were summarized and strictly screened. Invalid samples with insufficient interaction rounds or incomplete responses were excluded to ensure high data quality and reliable experimental conclusions.
- Conditions
- an Intelligent Teaching Agent for the "Epidemiology" Course of the MBBS Program, Students' Critical Thinking, Practical Ability and Learning Outcomes
- Being tested
- Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology, General LLM
- Keywords
- Artificial intelligence, Epidemiology, International medical curriculum, AI agent
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Socratic Agent for Guided EpidemiologyBehavioural
A total of 30 participants are assigned to the experimental group receiving the SAGE teaching model, namely the Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology.
General LLMBehavioural
30 participants are allocated to the control group with teaching assistance from a general large language model (General LLM).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention group | Experimental | Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology Receives: Behavioral: Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology |
| Control group | Active comparator | General LLM Receives: Behavioral: General LLM |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Clinical Epidemiology Knowledge Assessment Scale (Utrecht questionnaire on knowledge on clinical epidemiology for evidence-based practice)
The test consists of 19 multiple-choice questions and 2 calculation questions, each worth 1 point. There are also 4 essay questions, each worth 3 points. The total score is 33 points. The higher the score, the better the mastery of clinical epidemiology knowledge.
Measured: Before the intervention (One to seven days before starting the epidemiology course) and After the intervention(Within half a month after completing the epidemiology course)
Epidemiological Reasoning Test
This section consists of eleven questions and is designed to test students' epidemiological reasoning skills. Scores range from 0 to 11, with higher scores indicating higher levels of epidemiological reasoning ability.
Measured: Before the intervention (One to seven days before starting the epidemiology course ) and After the intervention(Within half a month after completing the epidemiology course)
Secondary outcomes (6)
System Usability Scale(SUS)
It consists of 10 items and is scored using the Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). The total score is converted to a range of 0-100 to evaluate the overall usability of the system. Additionally, based on a standardized scoring system, the SUS score is assigned letter grades, ranging from "F" (0-60 points) to "A" (91-100 points).
Measured: Immediately after intervention(One to seven days after completing the epidemiology course)
Needs and perceptions questionnaire (AI-powered simulation-based teaching agent)
This questionnaire employs the 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 to 5), with a total score range of 18 to 90. The higher the score, the greater the subject's acceptance of the AI-assisted teaching system, the effectiveness of teaching support, and the evaluation of its application value.
Measured: Qualitative research stage (one to five months before starting the epidemiology course
Student's final exam score in the Epidemiology course
The score ranges from 0 to 100 points. A score of 60 or above is considered passing.
Measured: Immediately after intervention(One to seven days after completing the epidemiology course)
Demographic information questionnaire
The title of this section is used to analyze demographic data, and it mainly includes Name,Tel,Birthday,Gender,Grade,Country,GPA or credit grade,Monthly Disposable income,your father's education level,your mother's education level, Previous AI Experience.
Measured: Before the intervention (One to seven days before starting the epidemiology course)
Learning Satisfaction and Self-confidence Scale
Participants rated each item using a Likert-type response scale indicating their level of agreement with the statements (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). the total score ranges from 13 to 65.Higher scores indicated greater satisfaction with the learning experience and higher perceived self-confidence in learning.
Measured: Immediately after intervention(One to seven days after completing the epidemiology course)
Cognitive Load Scale
The 10 items are scored on a scale of 0 ("completely not") to 10 ("completely"), with higher scores indicating greater cognitive load. Total score ranges from 0 to 100 points.
Measured: After the intervention(Within half a month after completing the epidemiology course)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted7 Aug 2026
- Study start15 May 2026
- Primary completion31 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Jan 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for an Intelligent Teaching Agent for the "Epidemiology" Course of the MBBS ProgramStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of MedicineThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07752160
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- KY-2025-374
- Status last verified
- Aug 2026
- First submitted
- 13 Jul 2026
- Last updated
- 7 Aug 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 Aug 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Research and Application of an AI Agent-Based MBBS Course Assistant
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07752160
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- KY-2025-374
- Conditions
- an Intelligent Teaching Agent for the "Epidemiology" Course of the MBBS Program, Students' Critical Thinking, Practical Ability and Learning Outcomes
- Keywords
- Artificial intelligence, Epidemiology, International medical curriculum, AI agent
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of MedicineUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 May 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 7 Aug 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Prior to the quasi-experiment, this study performed semi-structured interviews among Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery(MBBS) undergraduate students from the Belt and Road International Medical College, Zhejiang University. Based on learning science, cognitive load theory and causal inference frameworks, the interview outline focused on system usability, feedback quality, learning reasoning processes, cognitive burden and instructional optimization advice. Each 20-30 minute individual interview was audio-recorded with participants' informed consent and verbatim transcribed for standardized qualitative analysis.
The quasi-experiment recruited no fewer than 60 MBBS students. The sample size was determined by intergroup statistical power analysis to guarantee around 30 participants per group for valid intergroup comparison. All eligible students were randomly assigned into two groups with balanced demographic and academic baseline characteristics. The experimental group (n=30) received structured epidemiological learning assisted by the (Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology) SAGE (Artificial Intelligence)AI agent with professional Socratic cognitive guidance. The control group (n=30) adopted general large language model (LLM)-based learning without systematic thinking intervention. Participants with clinically diagnosed severe mental disorders, cognitive dysfunction or inability to finish the complete research process were excluded. A baseline epidemiological knowledge pre-test confirmed no significant academic differences between the two groups via independent samples t-test, and all participants had no prior experience of AI-assisted medical learning.
The semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect students' authentic learning experiences, interactive perceptions and cognitive characteristics during the use of SAGE agent and general LLMs, providing qualitative evidence for the iterative optimization of AI teaching tools. All interviewees completed baseline assessments and preliminary AI learning trials, ensuring qualified professional foundation and genuine interactive experience. Conducted by trained researchers, the standardized interviews centered on three core themes: system usability and feedback clarity; AI-induced changes in information extraction, hypothesis formulation and causal inference; and common learning barriers including interactive obstacles, comprehension difficulties, cognitive overload and potential AI over-reliance. Transcribed interview data were analyzed through thematic analysis to summarize typical user experience patterns. Qualitative outcomes were triangulated with quantitative experimental results to revise the SAGE teaching protocol, optimize agent prompt chains and improve the interpretation of experimental findings.
The quasi-experiment consisted of three standardized stages. In the pre-test stage, all participants signed informed consent, completed a 25-item clinical epidemiology knowledge scale, an 11-item reasoning ability test and a demographic questionnaire to establish consistent baseline levels. In the intervention stage, the experimental group received standardized training in confounder identification and causal inference construction in strict accordance with the SAGE teaching protocol. The SAGE agent improved students' advanced epidemiological reasoning ability through continuous multi-round Socratic questioning and targeted cognitive guidance. The control group received equal-duration learning in the same experimental environment, only using conventional search engines and unguided LLMs for basic information retrieval without any cognitive and thinking intervention. All participants submitted screenshots to record their accurate AI tool usage duration after completing learning tasks.
In the post-test stage, all participants finished parallel-version epidemiological knowledge assessments and unified reasoning ability tests. Validated scales were adopted to evaluate students' cognitive load, system usability, learning satisfaction and academic self-confidence. Students' final scores of the Epidemiology course were collected as supplementary indicators of long-term learning effectiveness. Upon the completion of data collection, backend AI interaction logs were summarized and strictly screened. Invalid samples with insufficient interaction rounds or incomplete responses were excluded to ensure high data quality and reliable experimental conclusions.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention group | Experimental | Behavioral: Socratic Agent for Guided EpidemiologySocratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology |
| Control group | Active comparator | Behavioral: General LLMGeneral LLM |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 16 to 25 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- 1: The undergraduate students of the "Belt and Road Initiative" International Medical School of Zhejiang University who have officially registered for the MBBS program
- 2: Voluntary signing of the informed consent form
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- 1: Having severe mental illnesses (such as severe depression, bipolar disorder, acute phase of schizophrenia), serious physical diseases or cognitive impairments
- 2: Is currently participating in other studies that may affect the outcome indicators of this research
- 3: Have systematically studied or participated in research that is highly similar to this study
- 4: No experience of AI agent learning
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Socratic Agent for Guided EpidemiologyA total of 30 participants are assigned to the experimental group receiving the SAGE teaching model, namely the Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology. | Behavioural | Intervention group |
| General LLM30 participants are allocated to the control group with teaching assistance from a general large language model (General LLM). | Behavioural | Control group |
Primary outcome
Clinical Epidemiology Knowledge Assessment Scale (Utrecht questionnaire on knowledge on clinical epidemiology for evidence-based practice)
Time frame: Before the intervention (One to seven days before starting the epidemiology course) and After the intervention(Within half a month after completing the epidemiology course)
The test consists of 19 multiple-choice questions and 2 calculation questions, each worth 1 point. There are also 4 essay questions, each worth 3 points. The total score is 33 points. The higher the score, the better the mastery of clinical epidemiology knowledge.
Epidemiological Reasoning Test
Time frame: Before the intervention (One to seven days before starting the epidemiology course ) and After the intervention(Within half a month after completing the epidemiology course)
This section consists of eleven questions and is designed to test students' epidemiological reasoning skills. Scores range from 0 to 11, with higher scores indicating higher levels of epidemiological reasoning ability.
6 secondary outcomes
System Usability Scale(SUS)
Time frame: Immediately after intervention(One to seven days after completing the epidemiology course)
Needs and perceptions questionnaire (AI-powered simulation-based teaching agent)
Time frame: Qualitative research stage (one to five months before starting the epidemiology course
Student's final exam score in the Epidemiology course
Time frame: Immediately after intervention(One to seven days after completing the epidemiology course)
Demographic information questionnaire
Time frame: Before the intervention (One to seven days before starting the epidemiology course)
Learning Satisfaction and Self-confidence Scale
Time frame: Immediately after intervention(One to seven days after completing the epidemiology course)
Cognitive Load Scale
Time frame: After the intervention(Within half a month after completing the epidemiology course)
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 7 Aug 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Socratic Agent for Guided Epidemiology and General LLM in people with an Intelligent Teaching Agent for the "Epidemiology" Course of the MBBS Program and Students' Critical Thinking, Practical Ability and Learning Outcomes, run by The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine at 1 site in China.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 Aug 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in China. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Yibo Wu (0579-89935056, wuyiboism@zju.edu.cn), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Clinical Epidemiology Knowledge Assessment Scale (Utrecht questionnaire on knowledge on clinical epidemiology for evidence-based practice) (time frame: Before the intervention (One to seven days before starting the epidemiology course) and After the intervention(Within half a month after completing the epidemiology course)). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 Aug 2026.