CaseMed

About CaseMed: The Science Behind Better Clinical Practice

CaseMed is a simulation platform for medical training, built for the moments learners can't rehearse with a textbook — hard conversations, decisions under uncertainty, and pattern recognition that only builds through repetition.

Clinician leaders and learners don't have time to waste. They need more efficient practice that represents the scenarios they face in real life. That's why we built the CaseMed platform around voice-based clinical encounters — the clinical interview is the interaction model that drives most healthcare.

We started CaseMed because the gap between learning and performing in the clinic has always been closed by volume. But clinical interactions come with risks and liability, and while simulated interactions are the safest way to learn, they come with high costs and other logistical constraints such as space, human resources, and expert time. Traditional simulation is also less repeatable than we would like it to be, and the kind of quality feedback that is key to improvement is difficult to scale effectively. For each student, and every encounter, we need an expert assessment.

That's where CaseMed fills the gap in training — more patients, more practice, more feedback in real time. Expert-curated knowledge and objectives are combined with AI-simulated patient personalities to deliver a realistic encounter with personalized performance feedback that is repeatable but not redundant, and available whenever you are.

What we've built

A clinical simulation platform with both learner-facing medical education content and leader-facing institution-grade tools for developing new cases that are purpose-built for your learners.

Realism first

Simulations only teach if they feel like the real thing. We use the latest AI-based technologies to imbue patients with the kinds of stories and emotion that are consistent with the medical problems they bring you — the ones you face in the clinic.

Accessibility

A microphone and a browser. No installs, no proctored windows, no scheduling around a lab. Practice belongs where the learner is and is available when they are.

Feedback that changes behavior

Feedback and a report are provided at the end of a case based on evidence-based principles. Feedback identifies objective completion tied to competencies, addresses specific gaps in performance, and gives actionable recommendations based on the interaction you just had. Performance metrics allow you to track insights across cases and identify areas to focus improvement.

Content that exceeds the bar

Every case is authored against a clinical framework based in guidelines and evidence, reviewed by clinicians, and version-controlled to allow for updates to evidence. Reports contain mapped references to the guidelines and evidence, so you'll always be confident your decisions are grounded in best practices.

What the research says actually works

We didn't guess when we founded our learning platform around developing excellence in clinical interviewing. We structured the platform based on the two primary ingredients medical education research consistently points to for durable clinical communication skill improvements — because communication has long been understood as foundational to clinical outcomes, symptom resolution, physiologic measures, patient satisfaction, and physician livelihoods1,2.

1. Feedback has to be specific — not just “good job.”

A Cochrane review of 76 studies and over 10,000 medical students found that personalized, specific feedback is what drives real improvement in communication skills — not generic praise or vague critique3. Education researchers have even defined what “specific” means: effective feedback names the task, identifies the gap between performance and the standard, and lays out a concrete action for closing it4,5.

The catch? Studies show this standard is rarely met. In one analysis of real feedback given to trainees, a clear action plan was included only 14% of the time4. Learners are told what they did — far less often are they told exactly what to do differently.

2. One rep isn't enough. Skills fade without repetition.

A single two-hour simulation-based training session can produce a measurable boost in communication skills that's still detectable three months later6. But without reinforcement, that boost doesn't last — research on clinical interviewing and communication skills training consistently shows measurable decline within four to six months of a single training exposure7,8. The good news: it doesn't take much to prevent that decline. Studies suggest three to four practice sessions spread across six months is enough to sustain hard-won skills8. Add a little more practice and now we're producing durable improvement over time.

Who's behind it

CaseMed cases aren't derivative AI-generated scenarios. The cases are mapped to priority medical topics and are authored by clinicians, grounded in real evidence, and focus on what changes practice. AI is a tool that we have used to promote simulation authenticity — we want our patients and interactions to feel as real as possible while still delivering the highest possible quality in medical education content. Above all, the cases must be real, the topics have to matter, the management has to be guideline-aligned, appropriate to the case, and real enough that you can translate the decisions you make with us to your practice today.

The clinical interview is where medicine actually happens. CaseMed was purpose-built for practicing realistic healthcare scenarios and delivers evidence-based, personalized feedback. With CaseMed, simulation-based clinical training is finally possible to scale — and learners and leaders alike can feel comfortable knowing that we share the challenges they face and the values they bring to their work each day, because we are clinicians too.

If you'd like to discuss content development, partnerships, or join our customer advisory board, get in touch.

References

  1. 1.Stewart MA. Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review. CMAJ. 1995;152(9):1423–33.
  2. 2.Levinson W, Roter DL, Mullooly JP, Dull VT, Frankel RM. Physician-Patient Communication: The Relationship With Malpractice Claims Among Primary Care Physicians and Surgeons. JAMA. 1997;277(7):553–9.
  3. 3.Gilligan C, Powell M, Lynagh MC, Ward BM, Lonsdale C, Harvey P, et al. Interventions for improving medical students' interpersonal communication in medical consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;2(2):CD012418.
  4. 4.Gauthier S, Cavalcanti R, Goguen J, Sibbald M. Deliberate practice as a framework for evaluating feedback in residency training. Medical Teacher. 2015;37(6):551–7.
  5. 5.Sadler DR. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science. 1989;18(2):119–44.
  6. 6.Bachmann C, Barzel A, Roschlaub S, Ehrhardt M, Scherer M. Can a brief two-hour interdisciplinary communication skills training be successful in undergraduate medical education? Patient Education and Counseling. 2013;93(2):298–305.
  7. 7.Carvalho IP, Pais VG, Almeida SS, Ribeiro-Silva R, Figueiredo-Braga M, Teles A, et al. Learning clinical communication skills: Outcomes of a program for professional practitioners. Patient Education and Counseling. 2011;84(1):84–9.
  8. 8.Schwalbe CS, Oh HY, Zweben A. Sustaining motivational interviewing: a meta-analysis of training studies. Addiction. 2014;109(8):1287–94.