Your students need more opportunities to interview patients, make clinical decisions, explain their reasoning and try again. MedicomSkills gives them those opportunities without you organising a simulated patient, an examiner and a room every time. And while they practise, you get something equally useful: a clear picture of how your class is performing.
Designed by a medical educator, for the questions that actually come up in a course meeting.
Create classes, invite students with a join code, assign activities and follow participation and progress without piecing together separate records.
Write your own clinical blueprints, generate patients from them, and read every one before it goes live. Examination cases sit in a reserved pool that never appears in practice.
Which criteria your students repeatedly miss, where performance is improving, and where your teaching might focus next. Named or anonymous views, and CSV export for your own analysis.
Timed circuits with stations in sequence and the task revealed on arrival. The clock is the server’s, not the browser’s, so closing a tab does not pause it. Fix the cases when consistency matters, or draw them fresh each sitting.
Decide how performance is marked, whether a near miss earns partial credit, and what happens to an activity a student leaves unfinished. Set per class.
Rehearsal gives feedback immediately and can be repeated as often as a student wants. An examination allows one sitting, holds feedback until you release it, and any retake is granted by you and recorded.
Students can read about patient-centred interviewing. They can watch someone else do it. They can memorise frameworks. Eventually they have to sit across from a patient and decide what to say next.
MedicomSkills is built around that moment. A student meets a patient, makes decisions, receives feedback based on what they actually did, reflects on the encounter, and gets another attempt.
Technology makes that cycle available more often. The educational model is unchanged — and it is where MedicomSkills began, rather than being a technology in search of an application.
A score tells you how a student performed. A pattern tells you what to teach.
MedicomSkills brings individual performances together at criterion level, revealing patterns that are difficult to see student by student.
Perhaps your students are taking thorough histories but rarely following an emotional cue. Perhaps red-flag screening is consistently thin. Perhaps one skill improves sharply after a teaching session and another does not move at all.
Which lets the data answer a more useful question than who is behind: what does this class need from me next?
It never decides the medicine. Every case begins from a clinical blueprint written and reviewed by a human: the diagnosis, the pertinent findings, the red flags a student should uncover, and the teaching point of the encounter. The generative model builds a patient around that skeleton — a personality, a way of speaking, a reason for coming today — and it cannot change the clinical facts it was given.
Generated cases are then read by a second model from a different provider before a human reviews them, on the reasoning that one model checking another catches careless error well and shared assumption badly. It is a filter, not a clearance: no case is ever approved automatically, and an educator signs off every case before a student meets it.
None of the approach here was invented for the platform. Every method below is long established in medical education and in use at institutions internationally — what is new is being able to do them without booking a room, a simulated patient and an examiner. You do not have to take our word for any of it: these are standards you can check against what you already know of the field.
MedicomSkills is independent: not affiliated with or endorsed by any examining body, and no examination material is reproduced here.
MedicomSkills is designed for practice and formative feedback. Its feedback is generated with AI, while the cases themselves are reviewed for clinical accuracy, coherence, and realistic patient behaviour.
We are careful not to claim more than the evidence supports. Mapping our case bank to a national blueprint is a statement about breadth — that the range of presentations is drawn from a recognised standard rather than from whatever came to mind. It is not a claim that our marking matches an examiner's. The feedback has not yet been validated against scores from human examiners, and we do not yet have the data to say that strong performance in MedicomSkills predicts strong performance in a real OSCE.
For now, MedicomSkills is best used as a space for practice, reflection and formative feedback — somewhere students can learn by doing, see where they can improve, and try again.
Create a class, choose what your students will work on, and see what happens when clinical communication training becomes something they do repeatedly rather than something they study.
Try it with your class →