Comparative Study on the Effectiveness of Real Case Teaching and AI-Generated Case Teaching in Speech Rehabilitation Education Running title: Real vs. AI Cases in Speech Rehab Education
Keywords:
Speech rehabilitation Education, Case-based Teaching, Artificial Intelligence, Professional Competency, Teaching Effectiveness, Educational Innovation, AI-generated cases, Mixed Teaching MethodAbstract
This study compared the effectiveness of real clinical cases versus AI-generated cases in speech rehabilitation professional education. Using a quasi-experimental design, 45 sophomore students majoring in rehabilitation therapy were randomly divided into real case (n = 23) and AI case (n = 22) groups. The intervention lasted two weeks, with pre-test and post-test assessments measuring students' theoretical knowledge and practical skills across four dimensions: diagnostic, intervention, treatment, and comprehensive abilities. Results showed significant overall improvement in both groups (p < 0.001, d = 0.92). While the real case group demonstrated greater improvement in intervention skills (25.7% vs. 14.6%), therapeutic skills (19.7% vs. 8.8%), and comprehensive abilities (17.4% vs. 5.7%), both groups showed comparable performance in diagnostic skills (13.0% vs. 12.0%). The findings suggest that real cases are more effective in developing advanced professional competencies, while AI-generated cases show promise in basic skill training. This study provides empirical evidence for implementing a staged approach to case-based teaching in speech rehabilitation education, combining the advantages of both real and AI-generated cases.
References
Santos BD, Rockenbach SP, Donicht G, Santos CD. Epidemiological profile of users referred to speech therapy in a municipality in Rio Grande do Sul. Audiol. Commun. Res. 2022, 27, e2621.
McAuliffe MJ, Schluter PJ, Jamieson HA. An epidemiological profile of communication disability among older adults with complex needs: A national cross-sectional study. Int. J. Speech-Lang. Pathol. 2019, 21, 537–546.
Bachmann C, Pettit J, Rosenbaum M. Developing communication curricula in healthcare education: An evidence-based guide. Patient Educ. Couns. 2022, 105, 2320–2327.
Gerup J, Soerensen CB, Dieckmann P. Augmented reality and mixed reality for healthcare education beyond surgery: an integrative review. Int. J. Med. Educ. 2020, 11, 1–18.
Maatuk AM, Elberkawi EK, Aljawarneh S, Rashaideh H, Alharbi H. The COVID-19 pandemic and E-learning: challenges and opportunities from the perspective of students and instructors. J. Comput. High Educ. 2022, 34, 21–38.
Hu X, Chiu MM, Leung WMV, Yelland N. Technology integration for young children during COVID-19: Towards future online teaching. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2021, 52, 1513–1537.
Sekhon J K, Oates J, Kneebone I, Rose ML. Counselling education for speech-language pathology students in Australia: a survey of education in post-stroke aphasia. Aphasiology 2022, 36, 1417–1446.
Donkin R, Yule H, Fyfe T. Online case-based learning in medical education: a scoping review. BMC Med. Educ. 2023, 23, 564.
Al-Balas M, et al. Distance learning in clinical medical education amid COVID-19 pandemic in Jordan: current situation, challenges, and perspectives. BMC Med. Educ. 2020, 20, 341.
Zhao W, et al. The effectiveness of the combined problem-based learning (PBL) and case-based learning (CBL) teaching method in the clinical practical teaching of thyroid disease. BMC Med. Educ. 2020, 20, 381.
Klimova B, Pikhart M, Kacetl J. Ethical issues of the use of AI-driven mobile apps for education. Front. Public Health 2023, 10.
Sapci AH, Sapci H A. Artificial Intelligence Education and Tools for Medical and Health Informatics Students: Systematic Review. JMIR Med. Educ. 2020, 6, e19285.
Cheung WS, Hew KF. Design and evaluation of two blended learning approaches: Lessons learned. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2011, 27.
Murdoch-Eaton D, Whittle S. Generic skills in medical education: developing the tools for successful lifelong learning. Med. Educ. 2012, 46, 120–128.
Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Bordage G. Quality of reporting of experimental studies in medical education: a systematic review. Med. Educ. 2007, 41, 737–745.
Scherr R, Halaseh FF, Spina A, Andalib S, Rivera R. ChatGPT Interactive Medical Simulations for Early Clinical Education: Case Study. JMIR Med. Educ. 2023, 9, e49877.
O’Brien BC, Battista A. Situated learning theory in health professions education research: a scoping review. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. Theory Pract. 2020, 25, 483–509.
Liu JYW, et al. The Effects of Immersive Virtual Reality Applications on Enhancing the Learning Outcomes of Undergraduate Health Care Students: Systematic Review With Meta-synthesis. J. Med. Internet Res. 2023, 25, e39989.
Benary M, et al. Leveraging Large Language Models for Decision Support in Personalized Oncology. JAMA Netw. Open 2023, 6, e2343689.
Triola MM, Burk-Rafel J. Precision Medical Education. Acad. Med. 2023, 98, 775–781.
Poort J, et al. Learning Enhances Sensory and Multiple Non-sensory Representations in Primary Visual Cortex. Neuron 2015, 86, 1478–1490.
Pervaz Iqbal M, Velan GM, O’Sullivan AJ, Balasooriya C. The collaborative learning development exercise (CLeD-EX): an educational instrument to promote key collaborative learning behaviours in medical students. BMC Med. Educ. 2020, 20, 62.
Tender JAF, et al. Educating pediatric residents about breastfeeding: evaluation of 3 time-efficient teaching strategies. J. Hum. Lact. 2014, 30, 458–465.
Dong H, et al. Effectiveness of case-based learning in Chinese dental education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2022, 12, e048497.
Raymond L, Castonguay A, Doyon O, Paré G. Nurse practitioners’ involvement and experience with AI-based health technologies: A systematic review. Appl. Nurs. Res. 2022, 66, 151604.
Bisbe M, et al. Comparative Cognitive Effects of Choreographed Exercise and Multimodal Physical Therapy in Older Adults with Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment: Randomized Clinical Trial. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2020, 73, 769–783.
Zhu L, et al. ChatGPT’s ability to generate realistic experimental images poses a new challenge to academic integrity. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2024, 17, 27.
Keelor JL, Creaghead NA, Silbert NH, Breit AD, Horowitz-Kraus T. Impact of text-to-speech features on the reading comprehension of children with reading and language difficulties. Ann. Dyslexia 2023, 73, 469–486.
Matre ME, Cameron DL. A scoping review on the use of speech-to-text technology for adolescents with learning difficulties in secondary education. Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. 2024, 19, 1103–1116.
Tan X, et al. NaturalSpeech: End-to-End Text-to-Speech Synthesis With Human-Level Quality. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2024, 46, 4234–4245.
Eriksson K, Sorjonen K, Falkstedt D, Melin B, Nilsonne G. A formal model accounting for measurement reliability shows attenuated effect of higher education on intelligence in longitudinal data. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2024, 11, 230513.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 by the authors and Hivereads Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
