AI vs. doctors: can a computer make the right call for sepsis?

NCT ID NCT07025096

First seen Jun 25, 2026 · Last updated Jul 24, 2026 · Updated 3 times

Summary

This study asks 350 critical care doctors and advanced practice providers to review fictional patient cases of sepsis and ARDS. Each case includes treatment recommendations that were either made by a real clinician or generated by an artificial intelligence system. The participants will judge whether the recommendations are safe and appropriate, and guess whether they came from a human or AI. The goal is to see if AI can produce recommendations that are indistinguishable from those of experienced clinicians.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance
Artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support system
What this could lead to
If successful, this could show that AI can help doctors make better decisions for sepsis and ARDS patients, potentially improving care in intensive care units.
What could go wrong
This is an early-stage survey study with 350 clinicians reviewing fictional cases, not real patients. It tests whether AI recommendations seem realistic, not whether they actually improve patient outcomes.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for ACUTE RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME (ARDS) are added.

Our safety recommendation!

By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • University of Pennsylvania

    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104, United States

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.