Artificial Intelligence in Simulation Design

INTRODUCTION: The creation of simulation scenarios is typically time-consuming and requires a high cognitive load. Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) can generate text, including simulation scenarios, but the output quality can be very user-dependent. The goal of this study is to explore if a customized version of ChatGPT can create simulation scenarios that are comparable to those written by humans. METHODS: In this observational cross-sectional study, simulation content experts scored 8 scenarios covering 4 pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) topics with one version written by health care educators and published on MedEdPORTAL, and another by a custom ChatGPT. Experts were blinded to the source of each case. The scenarios were assessed in 3 ways: an objective score from an established simulation scoring checklist, a subjective quality rating, and whether the experts would recommend the scenario for use. RESULTS: Seven experts with an average of 11 years of PEM training and an average of 10 years of simulation work scored simulations. While all 4 AI-generated cases had lower average scores on both quantitative assessments than their human-written counterparts, these results were not statistically significant. The majority of experts recommended each case to colleagues, regardless of source. There was moderate to excellent intrarater reliability. CONCLUSION: Human-written cases received higher scores than the AI-written cases. While these scores were not statistically significant, these differences highlight the importance of keeping a human-expert influence when using AI to produce simulation cases. This ChatGPT tool can therefore be useful in assisting in the timely creation of scenarios, allowing facilitators, regardless of their technical skill with AI, to decrease cognitive load. Next steps should move beyond evaluating the scenario text to include evaluation of the experience of facilitating the ChatGPT-derived pediatric simulations as well as assessing the perspectives of simulation operators.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare
Published
2026-08-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/sih.0000000000000953
Primary Topic
Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Artificial Intelligence in Simulation Design

Michael Hrdy, K Gupta, Khoon‐Yen Tay, Megan Lavoie et al.
Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare
Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
article

Artificial Intelligence in Simulation Design

Michael Hrdy, K Gupta, Khoon‐Yen Tay, Megan Lavoie, Sabrina Guse
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The creation of simulation scenarios is typically time-consuming and requires a high cognitive load. Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) can generate text, including simulation scenarios, but the output quality can be very user-dependent. The goal of this study is to explore if a customized version of ChatGPT can create simulation scenarios that are comparable to those written by humans. METHODS: In this observational cross-sectional study, simulation content experts scored 8 scenarios covering 4 pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) topics with one version written by health care educators and published on MedEdPORTAL, and another by a custom ChatGPT. Experts were blinded to the source of each case. The scenarios were assessed in 3 ways: an objective score from an established simulation scoring checklist, a subjective quality rating, and whether the experts would recommend the scenario for use. RESULTS: Seven experts with an average of 11 years of PEM training and an average of 10 years of simulation work scored simulations. While all 4 AI-generated cases had lower average scores on both quantitative assessments than their human-written counterparts, these results were not statistically significant. The majority of experts recommended each case to colleagues, regardless of source. There was moderate to excellent intrarater reliability. CONCLUSION: Human-written cases received higher scores than the AI-written cases. While these scores were not statistically significant, these differences highlight the importance of keeping a human-expert influence when using AI to produce simulation cases. This ChatGPT tool can therefore be useful in assisting in the timely creation of scenarios, allowing facilitators, regardless of their technical skill with AI, to decrease cognitive load. Next steps should move beyond evaluating the scenario text to include evaluation of the experience of facilitating the ChatGPT-derived pediatric simulations as well as assessing the perspectives of simulation operators.

Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Artificial Intelligence in Simulation Design — Michael Hrdy, K Gupta, et al. · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS