<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>12</volume><submitter>Takahashi H</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in medical education, including AI-based virtual patients to improve interview skills. However, how much AI-based assessment (ABA) differs from human-based assessment (HBA) remains unclear.&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>This study aimed to compare the quality of clinical interview assessments generated via an ABA (GPT-o1 Pro [ABA-o1] and GPT-5 Pro [ABA-5]) with those generated via an HBA conducted by clinical instructors in an AI-based virtual patient setting. We also examined whether AI reduced evaluation time and assessed agreement across participants with different levels of clinical experience.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>A standardized case of leg weakness was implemented in an AI-based virtual patient. Seven participants (2 medica</pubmed_abstract><journal>JMIR medical education</journal><pagination>e81673</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC12912650</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>AI- vs Human-Based Assessment of Medical Interview Transcripts in a Generative AI-Simulated Patient System: Cross-Sectional Validation Study.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC12912650</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Aiyama Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kishi M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Nagai S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Naito T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Matsuura T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Tomoda Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kondo T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Shikino K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Shinohara T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Yamada Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Tokushima Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sano F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Enomoto A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Watanabe R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Takahashi H</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>AI- vs Human-Based Assessment of Medical Interview Transcripts in a Generative AI-Simulated Patient System: Cross-Sectional Validation Study.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in medical education, including AI-based virtual patients to improve interview skills. However, how much AI-based assessment (ABA) differs from human-based assessment (HBA) remains unclear.&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>This study aimed to compare the quality of clinical interview assessments generated via an ABA (GPT-o1 Pro [ABA-o1] and GPT-5 Pro [ABA-5]) with those generated via an HBA conducted by clinical instructors in an AI-based virtual patient setting. We also examined whether AI reduced evaluation time and assessed agreement across participants with different levels of clinical experience.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>A standardized case of leg weakness was implemented in an AI-based virtual patient. Seven participants (2 medica</description><dates><release>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2026 Feb</publication><modification>2026-07-16T00:38:30.916Z</modification><creation>2026-07-09T10:26:28.154Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC12912650</accession><cross_references><pubmed>41701946</pubmed><doi>10.2196/81673</doi></cross_references></HashMap>