Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27177766›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical education2016

A qualitative analysis of virtual patient descriptions in healthcare education based on a systematic literature review.

Inga Hege, Andrzej A Kononowicz, Daniel Tolks, Samuel Edelbring, Katja Kuehlmeyer

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical education, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Establishing the acceptability and usability of an animated virtual patient simulation.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors.

Inga HegeInstitute for Medical Education, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Ziemssenstr. 1, München, 80336, Germany. inga.hege@med.uni-muenchen.
Andrzej A KononowiczDepartment of Bioinformatics and Telemedicine, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Daniel TolksInstitute for Medical Education, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Ziemssenstr. 1, München, 80336, Germany.
Samuel EdelbringDepartment of Learning, Informatics Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Katja KuehlmeyerInstitute for Ethics, History and Theory of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVirtual Patients (VPs) have been in the focus of research in healthcare education for many years. The aim of our study was to analyze how virtual patients are described in the healthcare education literature, and how the identified concepts relate to each other.

methodsWe performed a literature review and extracted 185 descriptions of virtual patients from the articles. In a qualitative content analysis approach we inductively-deductively developed categories and deducted subcategories. We constructed a concept map to illustrate these concepts and their interrelations.

resultsWe developed the following five main categories: Patient, Teacher, Virtual Patient, Curriculum, and Learner. The concept map includes these categories and highlights aspects such as the under-valued role of patients in shaping their virtual representation and opposing concepts, such as standardization of learner activity versus learner-centeredness.

conclusionsThe presented concept map synthesizes VP descriptions and serves as a basis for both, VP use and discussions of research topics related to virtual patients.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalPatient SimulationPatient-Specific ModelingHumansConcept mappingQualitative content analysisVirtual patients

Identifiers

PMID27177766
PMCPMC4865997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.