ArticleJMIR medical education2020
Comparison of Assessment by a Virtual Patient and by Clinician-Educators of Medical Students' History-Taking Skills: Exploratory Descriptive Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing and Validating a Coding Scheme for Clinical Reasoning in History Taking Using Generative AI-Based Virtual Patients: Systematic Text Condensation Approach.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Enhancing Dental Students' History-Taking Skills With a Generative Artificial Intelligence Chatbot.Journal of dental education · 2026Article
- Primary care physicians' perceptions of artificial intelligence systems in the care of adolescents' mental health.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Exploring medical students' perceptions of individual and group-based clinical reasoning with virtual patients: a qualitative study.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Predominant aspects of knowledge and practical skills among medical students with online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic era.Medical education online · 2023Article
- Learning Analytics Applied to Clinical Diagnostic Reasoning Using a Natural Language Processing-Based Virtual Patient Simulator: Case Study.JMIR medical education · 2022Article
- Assessment of Diagnostic Competences With Standardized Patients Versus Virtual Patients: Experimental Study in the Context of History Taking.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA virtual patient (VP) can be a useful tool to foster the development of medical history-taking skills without the inherent constraints of the bedside setting. Although VPs hold the promise of contributing to the development of students' skills, documenting and assessing skills acquired through a VP is a challenge.
objectiveWe propose a framework for the automated assessment of medical history taking within a VP software and then test this framework by comparing VP scores with the judgment of 10 clinician-educators (CEs).
methodsWe built upon 4 domains of medical history taking to be assessed (breadth, depth, logical sequence, and interviewing technique), adapting these to be implemented into a specific VP environment. A total of 10 CEs watched the screen recordings of 3 students to assess their performance first globally and then for each of the 4 domains.
resultsThe scores provided by the VPs were slightly higher but comparable with those given by the CEs for global performance and for depth, logical sequence, and interviewing technique. For breadth, the VP scores were higher for 2 of the 3 students compared with the CE scores.
conclusionsFindings suggest that the VP assessment gives results akin to those that would be generated by CEs. Developing a model for what constitutes good history-taking performance in specific contexts may provide insights into how CEs generally think about assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.