ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021
Assessment of Diagnostic Competences With Standardized Patients Versus Virtual Patients: Experimental Study in the Context of History Taking.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing medical education for undergraduates: integrating virtual reality and case-based learning for shoulder joint.BMC medical education · 2024Trial
- Virtual patients and standardized patients combined training is associated with improved clinical reasoning among medical students.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Interdisciplinary medical education practices: building a case-driven interdisciplinary simulation system based on public datasets.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Virtual Patients Using Large Language Models: Scalable, Contextualized Simulation of Clinician-Patient Dialogue With Feedback.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Analysis of virtual standardized patients for assessing clinical fundamental skills of medical students: a prospective study.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- The Agreement Between Virtual Patient and Unannounced Standardized Patient Assessments in Evaluating Primary Health Care Quality: Multicenter, Cross-sectional Pilot Study in 7 Provinces of China.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Implementing Remote Collaboration in a Virtual Patient Platform: Usability Study.JMIR medical education · 2022Article
- Using a Virtual Patient via an Artificial Intelligence Chatbot to Develop Dental Students' Diagnostic Skills.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The application of the spot the difference teaching method in clinical skills training for residents.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Online medical history taking course: Opportunities and limitations in comparison to traditional bedside teaching.GMS journal for medical education · 2022Article
- Learning to diagnose accurately through virtual patients: do reflection phases have an added benefit?BMC medical education · 2021Article
- Virtual Standardized Patients for Mental Health Education.Current psychiatry reports · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStandardized patients (SPs) have been one of the popular assessment methods in clinical teaching for decades, although they are resource intensive. Nowadays, simulated virtual patients (VPs) are increasingly used because they are permanently available and fully scalable to a large audience. However, empirical studies comparing the differential effects of these assessment methods are lacking. Similarly, the relationships between key variables associated with diagnostic competences (ie, diagnostic accuracy and evidence generation) in these assessment methods still require further research.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to compare perceived authenticity, cognitive load, and diagnostic competences in performance-based assessment using SPs and VPs. This study also aims to examine the relationships of perceived authenticity, cognitive load, and quality of evidence generation with diagnostic accuracy.
methodsWe conducted an experimental study with 86 medical students (mean 26.03 years, SD 4.71) focusing on history taking in dyspnea cases. Participants solved three cases with SPs and three cases with VPs in this repeated measures study. After each case, students provided a diagnosis and rated perceived authenticity and cognitive load. The provided diagnosis was scored in terms of diagnostic accuracy; the questions asked by the medical students were rated with respect to their quality of evidence generation. In addition to regular null hypothesis testing, this study used equivalence testing to investigate the absence of meaningful effects.
resultsPerceived authenticity (1-tailed t
conclusionsThe results on perceived authenticity demonstrate that learners experience SPs as more authentic than VPs. As higher amounts of intrinsic and extraneous cognitive loads are detrimental to performance, both types of cognitive load must be monitored and manipulated systematically in the assessment. Diagnostic accuracy was higher for SPs than for VPs, which could potentially negatively affect students' grades with VPs. We identify and discuss possible reasons for this performance difference between both assessment methods.
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.