Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33230350›Full record

ArticleClinical social work journal2021

Computerized Clinical Training Simulations with Virtual Clients Abusing Alcohol: Initial Feasibility, Acceptability, and Effectiveness.

Matthew J Smith, Lindsay A Bornheimer, Juliann Li, Shannon Blajeski, Barbara Hiltz, Daniel J Fischer, Katherine Check, Mary Ruffolo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical social work journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Virtual patients in undergraduate psychiatry education: a systematic review and synthesis.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2024
    Pooled it
  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

8 authors.

Matthew J SmithSchool of Social Work, University of Michigan, 1080 South University Avenue, Room 3796, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0079-1477
Lindsay A BornheimerSchool of Social Work, University of Michigan, 1080 South University Avenue, Room 3796, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106 USA.
Juliann LiSchool of Social Work, University of Michigan, 1080 South University Avenue, Room 3796, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106 USA.
Shannon BlajeskiSchool of Social Work, University of Michigan, 1080 South University Avenue, Room 3796, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106 USA.
Barbara HiltzSchool of Social Work, University of Michigan, 1080 South University Avenue, Room 3796, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106 USA.
Daniel J FischerSchool of Social Work, University of Michigan, 1080 South University Avenue, Room 3796, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106 USA.
Katherine CheckSchool of Social Work, University of Michigan, 1080 South University Avenue, Room 3796, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106 USA.
Mary RuffoloSchool of Social Work, University of Michigan, 1080 South University Avenue, Room 3796, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106 USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although masters-level social work students typically build clinical skills via role-playing with their peers or instructors, several innovative training simulations are emerging in the literature that may enhance existing skill-building methodologies. We evaluated the initial feasibility, acceptability, usability, and effectiveness of three computerized simulations (two cognitive behavioral therapy, one motivational interviewing) during an interpersonal practice course among 22 students in a Master of Social Work program accredited by the Council on Social Work Education. Trainees repetitively practiced their clinical skills with virtual clients while receiving feedback via real-time nonverbal cues, transcript review, and performance assessment across pre-specified theoretical learning objectives. Across the three simulations, at least 86.4% of students completed the required protocol and completed M = 468.95 (SD = 178.27) minutes of simulated sessions. Students improved their scores (range 0 to 100) across all the simulations from M = 63.41 (SD = 11.13) to M = 93.64 (SD = 3.24). Students found the simulations to be acceptable with strong usability. Paired sample

Indexed as

Clinical trainingSimulationsSocial work educationVirtual clients

Identifiers

PMID33230350
PMCPMC7674574

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.