Skip to main content

PACES Scenario Generator

PACES Scenario Generator AI-assisted clinical scenario drafting for MRCP examiners Clinical Pilot AI

A research pilot exploring whether AI-generated PACES scenario drafts — covering patient demographics, presenting complaint, personality and ICE — can meaningfully reduce the time burden on clinical examiners and scenario writers.

Status Pilot — active research
Exam context MRCP Part 2 PACES — Practical Assessment of Clinical Examination Skills
Team Adrian Cowell, Ehigie, Naomi E, Corey Briffa
Tech stack Vite, React, TypeScript, Netlify, Claude AI
Live app paces-generator-7b40ef.netlify.app

The Challenge

PACES examinations require a substantial library of realistic simulated patient scenarios. Each scenario must specify a presenting complaint, relevant history, personality and affect, and — critically — the patient’s Ideas, Concerns, and Expectations (ICE): the structured framework that underpins the communication skills station.

Writing these from scratch is time-consuming, and recruiting clinical examiners for a full scenario-writing session is logistically difficult. The question this pilot set out to explore: can AI-generated drafts serve as a credible starting point, reducing the editing burden to something that fits within a shorter, more practical working session?

What the Tool Does

The generator takes a structured set of inputs and produces a complete scenario draft. Clinicians provide the clinical framing; the AI handles the narrative expansion.

Clinical inputs

  • Scenario title
  • Patient age & gender
  • Presenting complaint
  • Occupation
  • Personality & affect

ICE framework

  • Ideas — patient’s beliefs about their condition
  • Concerns — worries or fears they hold
  • Expectations — what they hope from the consultation

Try the App

The pilot build is live. Fill in the clinical parameters and generate a scenario draft in under a minute.

Open PACES Scenario Generator →

Research Approach

The pilot is exploring a core question about examiner time and cognitive load: is it faster and more sustainable to edit a generated draft than to write a scenario from a blank page? The hypothesis is that AI pre-drafting lowers the barrier to scenario contribution — making it feasible for busy clinicians to engage in shorter, focused review sessions rather than extended writing workshops.

The research also considers quality: whether AI-generated ICE narratives are clinically plausible enough to serve as a meaningful starting point, or whether they require substantial reworking. Findings will inform whether a larger-scale deployment would offer a genuine efficiency gain.

Potential Next Steps

Depending on pilot findings, potential directions include a structured time-comparison study (draft-and-edit vs. write-from-scratch), expansion of the scenario parameter set to cover more PACES stations, and integration with existing scenario management or exam platform workflows.