Peking Union Medical College Hospital ICU Units
Beijing, Beijing Municipality, 100730, China
Location status: Recruiting
NCT Number: NCT07692035
This trial is an ongoing single-center, pragmatic, parallel-group randomized controlled superiority trial currently in participant recruiting phase, conducted within intensive care unit teaching wards at Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China. The scheduled trial implementation period spans March 2026 to June 2026, aiming to evaluate whether an institution-specific, protocol-bound retrieval-augmented AI educational agent (named ICU-Tutor) can reduce residents' extraneous cognitive load and improve standardized ICU protocol task performance compared with free access to unrestricted commercial general-purpose large language model AI tools during early ICU clinical rotation.
The trial plans to screen a total of 44 first-time ICU rotating resident candidates, with pre-defined exclusion standards to eliminate unqualified individuals; approximately 44 eligible residents will undergo 1:1 stratified randomization and be split into two research arms: 22 participants assigned to the ICU-Tutor intervention group and 22 assigned to the unrestricted general AI control group.
All enrolled subjects will complete standardized 14-day follow-up assessments as pre-specified in the trial protocol. Both study cohorts receive unified 15-minute standardized training covering standardized safe AI clinical application rules prior to formal intervention initiation. ICU-Tutor is strictly built on a curated knowledge base including 247 ICU institutional protocols validated by senior attending intensivists, with all AI outputs traceable back to original local protocol documents and constrained within verified institutional guidance content only. The control arm allows participants to select and utilize any mainstream general large-model AI tools per personal preference without content or access limitations, consistent with real-world daily resident clinical practice.
Two co-primary endpoints are uniformly scheduled to be measured on the 7th day after randomization, including total completion duration of standardized ICU protocol task battery and Paas 9-point validated cognitive load scale score reflecting participants' subjective mental workload during task execution. Three confirmatory secondary endpoints are pre-defined for centralized assessment: composite task performance score on Day7, written institutional protocol knowledge retention score tested on Day14, and 0-100-point visual analog scale (VAS) evaluating resident satisfaction toward allocated AI support on Day7. Individual sub-station scores of three split practical ICU skill modules are set as exploratory secondary endpoints for post-hoc descriptive analysis only.
The statistical analysis framework is pre-specified to follow intention-to-treat principle entirely. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) is selected as core analytical method for all continuous outcomes, with Day3 baseline assessment result and participants' academic training background set as pre-planned covariates. Bonferroni multiple-testing correction is applied for dual co-primary endpoints, while Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (FDR) correction is pre-specified to control type I error across three confirmatory secondary outcomes. Effect sizes will be quantified via Cohen's d after raw data collection and database lock.
The trial has obtained formal ethical approval from the Institutional Review Board of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (Approval ID: I-26ZM0024). Every enrolled resident provides written informed consent before random assignment.
Interested in participating?
Request Info18 year–40 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Beijing, Beijing Municipality, 100730, China
Location status: Recruiting
General-purpose large language model (LLM) AI tools have gained widespread popularity as supplementary learning resources among medical trainees worldwide. Nevertheless, conventional off-the-shelf LLMs lack embedded access to hospital-specific, site-validated ICU clinical protocols, which leads to generalized, decontextualized recommendations inconsistent with local institutional practice requirements. Consequently, residents are forced to spend extra working memory to validate AI-generated suggestions against internal hospital guidelines, generating avoidable cognitive burden that impedes on-the-job protocol learning and bedside task execution.
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) framework enables customized institutional AI agents bounded exclusively within locally approved ICU protocols, delivering source-cited, site-compliant clinical guidance without requiring post-hoc manual verification by trainees. Existing medical education AI research predominantly evaluates model performance on generalized medical knowledge examinations rather than real-world on-site protocol application within authentic ICU working environments. This prospective randomized controlled trial is designed to fill this research gap by comparing the educational benefits of a hospital-customized protocol-locked AI agent (ICU-Tutor) versus unrestricted free access to commercial general LLMs among first-time ICU rotating residents during a standardized 14-day observation window. The core research hypothesis specifies that ICU-Tutor will lower resident cognitive load and improve protocol-based task performance relative to open-access general AI.
Confirmatory Secondary Objectives
Three pre-specified secondary endpoints will undergo formal statistical testing with pre-defined multiple-testing correction rules:
Compare composite standardized practical task performance scores between the two study arms at post-randomization Day 7; Quantify inter-group differences of institutional ICU protocol knowledge retention via closed-book written assessment administered on Day 14; Measure participant satisfaction differences toward assigned AI support tools using a 0-100 visual analogue scale (VAS) collected on Day 7.
Exploratory Objective Separate individual score analysis across three independent practical assessment stations including airway management, hemodynamic assessment and ventilator troubleshooting will be implemented as exploratory analyses only. No formal statistical correction will be applied for these sub-station outcomes, whose aggregated total score constitutes the composite Day7 task performance primary secondary endpoint. All exploratory findings are intended for hypothesis generation rather than confirmatory conclusion.
Screening & Randomization Target Sample Size The research team plans to consecutively screen a total of 44 incoming rotating residents who initiate ICU rotation within the March-June 2026 recruitment window. Per pre-trial protocol estimation, all screened candidates are anticipated to satisfy pre-set eligibility criteria without exclusion, leading to full randomization of 44 qualified participants at a fixed 1:1 allocation ratio: 22 subjects assigned to the ICU-Tutor intervention group and another 22 participants allocated to the unrestricted general-AI control group. Recruitment activities are completed during centralized departmental resident orientation sessions hosted by the hospital's Division of Critical Care Medicine.
Complete participant blinding is not feasible due to distinct functional differences between the customized ICU-Tutor system and heterogeneous commercial general AI software products, and all residents are aware of their assigned AI tool category after randomization. To minimize assessment bias, all attending physicians responsible for grading standardized practical station assessments remain fully blinded to individual participants' group assignment throughout endpoint evaluation. Independent research coordinators exclusively manage randomization codes and participant grouping information, entirely separated from clinical assessors responsible for outcome scoring.
Intervention Arm (ICU-Tutor, Planned n=22) ICU-Tutor is built on a strict RAG architecture anchored to a curated institutional knowledge repository containing 247 ICU-specific clinical protocols comprehensively peer-reviewed and validated by senior attending intensivists from the host hospital's critical care department. The covered protocol spectrum includes mechanical ventilation management, hemodynamic support, sedation and analgesia regulation, continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), antimicrobial stewardship codes, in-hospital emergency response algorithms, ICU enteral/parenteral nutrition guidance, delirium screening and intervention, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, and end-of-life institutional care protocols.
A conservative safety constraint is embedded within ICU-Tutor's core algorithm: all system-generated responses are strictly limited to information retrieved exclusively from pre-approved internal protocol documents, with each output attached with traceable source links referencing original institutional guideline files. The hospital's ICU clinical governance committee assumes ongoing responsibility for periodic repository updates to maintain protocol currency throughout trial implementation.
Control Arm (Unrestricted General-Purpose AI, Planned n=22) Control-group participants receive full unrestricted permission to select any commercially available mainstream general LLMs per individual personal preference, matching routine off-protocol resident AI usage in real clinical practice. No constraints are imposed on tool type, daily access frequency or usage duration for control subjects. Consistent with pragmatic trial design goals, centralized backend usage log collection is not pre-scheduled for control participants given the heterogeneous assortment of self-selected third-party AI platforms.
Co-Primary Endpoints (Uniform Day7 Assessment) Total task completion time (in minutes): cumulative time spent finishing a composite standardized ICU protocol task battery consisting of three independent practical assessment stations; Paas 9-point cognitive load scale score: validated single-item subjective rating ranging from 1 (extremely low mental workload) to 9 (extremely high mental workload), measuring overall perceived cognitive burden generated during standardized protocol task completion.
Confirmatory Secondary Endpoints Day7 composite practical task performance score (0-100 total points): aggregated total score combined from three separate practical station evaluations graded by blinded attending physicians using unified standardized checklists; Day14 institutional protocol knowledge retention score (percentage scoring): closed-book written examination covering core content of the hospital's verified ICU protocols; Day7 AI satisfaction VAS (0-100): continuous visual analogue scale measuring participants' overall satisfaction with their allocated AI auxiliary resource.
Exploratory Endpoints Independent discrete scoring results for three individual practical sub-stations: airway management (max 40 points), hemodynamic assessment (max 30 points), ventilator troubleshooting (max 30 points). These discrete sub-station results are solely for exploratory post-hoc analysis and are not defined as formal confirmatory trial endpoints. Supplementary self-reported learning efficiency questionnaires will be collected descriptively without pre-planned inter-group statistical comparison.
Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) is pre-specified as the primary statistical model for all continuous confirmatory endpoints, incorporating study grouping as fixed independent factor alongside two pre-defined covariates: Day3 baseline knowledge score and resident academic training background (undergraduate, master's or doctoral clinical training track). Bonferroni correction is pre-applied to the two co-primary endpoints to adjust familywise type I error rate; Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (FDR) correction will be implemented across three confirmatory secondary outcomes to mitigate multiple testing bias. Cohen's d standardized mean difference is pre-selected as uniform effect-size metric for all between-group comparisons after database lock and data finalization.
Per original trial protocol design, full participant follow-up is anticipated for all enrolled 44 subjects, hence no pre-planned multiple imputation strategy for missing outcome data is defined. All exploratory sub-station score comparisons will use unadjusted statistical testing without any multiple-testing correction, with findings interpreted only for future hypothesis development.
Every enrolled resident reserves unconditional right to voluntarily withdraw trial participation at any timepoint without punitive consequences affecting their routine ICU rotation evaluation or clinical training progress. All ICU-Tutor generated outputs are prominently labeled as AI-derived auxiliary guidance to avoid excessive clinical reliance by residents, fully complying with pre-defined clinical safety specifications. No identifiable patient protected health information is collected or processed during ICU-Tutor operation or full trial execution.
Several inherent structural limitations are prospectively acknowledged within the finalized trial protocol prior to participant recruitment initiation:
Single-center trial setting restricts external generalizability of final trial results to ICUs with divergent institutional protocols or distinct resident training systems at other medical institutions; Limited 14-day follow-up window cannot capture long-term sustained learning improvement or persistent clinical competency shifts after completion of early ICU rotation; No patient-level clinical outcome indicators are embedded within the trial design, prohibiting evaluation of indirect AI-associated influences on real-world patient care metrics; Non-blinded participants create potential risk of novelty or expectation bias impacting subjective scoring for cognitive load and satisfaction VAS endpoints; Heterogeneous self-selected general AI tools within control arm without unified usage log collection restricts secondary exploratory analysis linking AI usage frequency to measured outcomes; additionally, long-term sustainable ICU-Tutor operation requires continuous clinical governance to update institutional protocol repositories and monitor rare potential AI output inaccuracies.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) AI system built exclusively on verified local ICU protocols covering mechanical ventilation, hemodynamic management, sedation/analgesia, CRRT, antimicrobial stewardship, emergency response, nutrition, delirium, VTE prevention, and end-of-life care. All responses are limited to pre-approved content with embedded source citations.
Participants may use any mainstream general AI platforms (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini) without restrictions on tool type, usage frequency, or content scope. No centralized usage logging will be performed for this arm.
Time frame: Day 7 post-randomization
Cumulative time (in minutes) required to complete a 3-station standardized practical assessment covering core ICU protocol applications
Time frame: Day 7 post-randomization
Validated single-item subjective rating of mental workload during task completion, ranging from 1 (extremely low mental effort) to 9 (extremely high mental effort)
Time frame: Day 7 post-randomization
Aggregated score (0-100 points) from the 3-station practical assessment, graded by blinded attending physicians using standardized checklists
Time frame: Day 7 post-randomization
100-mm continuous VAS measuring overall satisfaction with assigned AI support, ranging from 0 (very dissatisfied) to 100 (very satisfied)
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
Yuankai Zhou,Associate Professor, Department of Critical Care Medicine, MD
CONTACT
Peking Union Medical College Hospital
Other
Effect of a Localized ICU-Specific AI Teaching Agent on Institutional Workflow Mastery and Clinical Competency in Rotating ICU Residents: A Single-Center, Parallel-Group, Randomized Controlled Superiority Trial
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.