PhysiCase: Development and dual-layer validation of synthetic cases for health professional education: A pilot study leveraging Generative AI
Komolafe, O. O.; Roberts, A. C.; Shelley, J.; Tawiah, A. K.
Show abstract
High-quality, domain-specific datasets are foundational to advancing educational tools and AI systems in healthcare, yet assembling case repositories from real-world clinical records faces substantial privacy, ethical, and licensing barriers. Synthetic data generation offers a compelling pathway forward, but educational cases require rigorous validation to ensure clinical plausibility and pedagogical utility. This pilot study introduces PhysiCase, a dual-layer validation pipeline for synthetic case generation and evaluates the feasibility of combining automated LLM-based screening with expert educator review. We generated 128 synthetic musculoskeletal(MSK) cases using four frontier large language models (GPT-4.1, GPT-4o, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro, and Llama 4 Scout) across 28 clinical conditions. Cases underwent automated quality screening using an "LLM-as-judge" framework (DeepEval) assessing prompt alignment, JSON correctness, answer relevance, bias, toxicity, and completeness. Ninety cases (70.3%) passed automated filtering and proceeded to expert evaluation by four MSK physiotherapy educators, who rated medical accuracy, realism, fidelity, relevance, and usability on 5-point Likert scales. GPT-4.1 demonstrated the highest automated pass rate (96\%) and strongest expert ratings (medical accuracy 4.10/5, usability 4.38/5), while Llama 4 Scout showed the lowest pass rate (33.3%) and expert ratings. Expert-evaluated cases achieved strong content validity indices for usability (97.5%), relevance (97.5%), and realism (95%), though medical accuracy showed greater variance (CVI 87.5%). Cross-layer correlation analysis revealed that automated completeness metrics moderately aligned with expert usability ratings , while answer relevance and prompt alignment showed weak or negative correlations with clinical correctness. Qualitative analysis identified three primary failure modes: reductive logic, biomechanical inconsistency, and administrative/contextual gaps. The dual-layer validation framework proved methodologically viable: automated screening efficiently reduced expert review burden, while human judgment remained indispensable for detecting subtle clinical reasoning failures. LLM-generated synthetic cases has the potential to meet practical educational needs for MSK physiotherapy, but expert validation is essential to safeguard clinical accuracy. These findings support a scalable division of labour for synthetic case development, with targeted improvements to prompting and automated reasoning checks needed to address identified "nuance gaps." The code for this paper is available on https://github.com/kwid-ai/PhysiCase
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Harnessing the Open Access Version of ChatGPT for Enhanced Clinical Opinions 94%
- Development and preliminary testing of Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL): A framework for healthcare delivery organizations to mitigate the risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities 94%
- Raising awareness of potential biases in medical machine learning: Experience from a Datathon 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Reliable data collection in participatory trials to assess digital healthcare apps. 92%
- An Accurate and Explainable Deep Learning System Improves Interobserver Agreement in the Interpretation of Chest Radiograph 90%
- Feeling Positive About Reopening?New Normal Scenarios from COVID-19 ReopenSentiment Analytics 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluating the impact on clinical task efficiency of a natural language processing algorithm for searching medical documents: Prospective crossover study 95%
- Transformative potential of Large Language Models in data mining on Electronic Health Records. 94%
- Assessment of Accuracy and Safety of LabTest Checker (LTC-AI) 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.