Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 15, 2026
Introduction of an Integrated Pathology Image Management, Artificial Intelligence, and Reporting System
Published on: July 11, 2025
A comparison of the quality of integrated case formulations produced by UK psychiatric trainees and an artificial
Mohammed J Abbas1,2, Hannah Fosker1, Harry Dudson1
1Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trusthttps://ror.org/045wcpc71, Leicester, UK.
Aims And Method:
This study aimed to evaluate an artificial intelligence-assisted tool for psychiatric case formulation compared with human trainees. Twenty trainees and an artificial intelligence system produced formulations for three simulated psychiatric cases. Formulations were scored using the integrated case formulation scale (ICFS), assessing content, integration and total quality. Time taken was recorded, and assessor predictions of formulation origin were analysed.
Results:
Artificial intelligence produced formulations significantly faster (<10 s) than trainees (mean 52.1 min). Trainees achieved higher ICFS total scores (mean difference 8.3, P < 0.001), driven by superior content scores, while integration scores were comparable. The assessor identified artificial intelligence-generated formulations with 71.4% sensitivity, but overall accuracy of who produced the formulations was only 58.3%.
Clinical Implications:
Artificial intelligence shows promise as a time-saving adjunct in psychiatric training and practice, but requires improvements in generating detailed content. Optimising teaching methods for trainees and refining artificial intelligence systems can enhance the integration of artificial intelligence into clinical workflows.
