Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29599421›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of medical education2018

Learning through a virtual patient vs. recorded lecture: a comparison of knowledge retention in a trauma case.

Olivier Courteille, Madelen Fahlstedt, Johnson Ho, Leif Hedman, Uno Fors, Hans von Holst, Li Felländer-Tsai, Hans Möller

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Simulation-Based Education in Trauma Management: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The Impact of COVID-19 on Surgical Education.The Journal of surgical research · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors.

Olivier Courteille
Madelen Fahlstedt
Johnson HoUnit of Neuronic Engineering, School of Technology and Health, Royal Institute of Technology, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.
Leif HedmanDepartment of Psychology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Uno ForsDepartment of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Hans von HolstUnit of Neuronic Engineering, School of Technology and Health, Royal Institute of Technology, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.
Li Felländer-TsaiDepartment of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Division of Orthopaedics and Biotechnology, Karolin-ska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.
Hans MöllerDepartment of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Division of Orthopaedics and Biotechnology, Karolin-ska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare medical students' and residents' knowledge retention of assessment, diagnosis and treatment procedures, as well as a learning experience, of patients with spinal trauma after training with either a Virtual Patient case or a video-recorded traditional lecture.

methodsA total of 170 volunteers (85 medical students and 85 residents in orthopedic surgery) were randomly allocated (stratified for student/resident and gender) to either a video-recorded standard lecture or a Virtual Patient-based training session where they interactively assessed a clinical case portraying a motorcycle accident. The knowledge retention was assessed by a test immediately following the educational intervention and repeated after a minimum of 2 months. Participants' learning experiences were evaluated with exit questionnaires. A repeated-measures analysis of variance was applied on knowledge scores. A total of 81% (n = 138) of the participants completed both tests.

resultsThere was a small but significant decline in first and second test results for both groups (F

conclusionsParticipants' levels engagement were reported in favor of the VP format. Similar knowledge retention was achieved through either a Virtual Patient or a recorded lecture.

Indexed as

Patient-Specific ModelingRetention, PsychologyVideo RecordingVirtual RealityAccidents, TrafficAdultComputer-Assisted InstructionEducational MeasurementFemaleHumansKnowledgeLearningMaleMotorcyclesProblem-Based LearningStudents, Medicalbiomechanicsknowledge retentionsimulation-based trauma educationswedenvirtual patient

Identifiers

PMID29599421
PMCPMC5951773

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.