Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18542907›Full record

ArticleDer Nervenarzt2008

[Clinical teaching with simulated patients in psychiatry and psychotherapy. A controlled pilot study].

M Wündrich, J Peters, A Philipsen, M Kopasz, M Berger, U Voderholzer

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

M WündrichAbteilung für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Universitätsklinikum, Hauptstrasse 5, 79104, Freiburg, Germany.
J Peters
A Philipsen
M Kopasz
M Berger
U Voderholzer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because of the new medical licensure act in Germany, much more bedside teaching than before is needed. For many of the relevant clinical pictures, few patients can be expected to undergo study lessons. That is why many universities use simulated patients (SP). In contrast to other disciplines such as internal medicine or surgery, there is not much literature about SP in psychiatry and psychotherapy. The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate if SP used for clinical teaching in addition to real patients are well accepted for simulation of psychiatric illnesses and clinical teaching. After randomization, one half of the 139 study medical students were taught using real patients and the other half using real patients and SP. The amounts of patient contact were equal in both groups. Using a questionnaire, pre- and postanalysis was carried out of answers about communication skills, the capability of addressing difficult subjects such as suicidality, and interest in psychiatry. The acceptance rate of SP was very high. Students' ratings of clinical teaching and their own performance, and their interest in future psychiatric work were significantly higher in the SP group. The results of this pilot study are very encouraging and indicate that the systematic use of SP in clinical psychiatric teaching is not only an appropriate alternative to real patients but also can lead to higher quality.

Indexed as

CurriculumPatient SimulationEducational MeasurementEducation, MedicalGermanyHumansMental DisordersPatientsPilot ProjectsPsychiatryPsychotherapyStudents, Medical

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.