Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34620156›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2021

Learning to diagnose accurately through virtual patients: do reflection phases have an added benefit?

Maximilian C Fink, Nicole Heitzmann, Matthias Siebeck, Frank Fischer, Martin R Fischer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maximilian C FinkInstitute of Medical Education, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Pettenkoferstr. 8a, 80336, Munich, Germany. Maximilian.Fink@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Nicole HeitzmannDepartment of Psychology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Matthias SiebeckInstitute of Medical Education, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Pettenkoferstr. 8a, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Frank FischerDepartment of Psychology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Martin R FischerInstitute of Medical Education, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Pettenkoferstr. 8a, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DELMU Klinikum · DE

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft FOR2385
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSimulation-based learning with virtual patients is a highly effective method that could potentially be further enhanced by including reflection phases. The effectiveness of reflection phases for learning to diagnose has mainly been demonstrated for problem-centered instruction with text-based cases, not for simulation-based learning. To close this research gap, we conducted a study on learning history-taking using virtual patients. In this study, we examined the added benefit of including reflection phases on learning to diagnose accurately, the associations between knowledge and learning, and the diagnostic process.

methodsA sample of N = 121 medical students completed a three-group experiment with a control group and pre- and posttests. The pretest consisted of a conceptual and strategic knowledge test and virtual patients to be diagnosed. In the learning phase, two intervention groups worked with virtual patients and completed different types of reflection phases, while the control group learned with virtual patients but without reflection phases. The posttest again involved virtual patients. For all virtual patients, diagnostic accuracy was assessed as the primary outcome. Current hypotheses were tracked during reflection phases and in simulation-based learning to measure diagnostic process.

resultsRegarding the added benefit of reflection phases, an ANCOVA controlling for pretest performance found no difference in diagnostic accuracy at posttest between the three conditions, F(2, 114) = 0.93, p = .398. Concerning knowledge and learning, both pretest conceptual knowledge and strategic knowledge were not associated with learning to diagnose accurately through reflection phases. Learners' diagnostic process improved during simulation-based learning and the reflection phases.

conclusionsReflection phases did not have an added benefit for learning to diagnose accurately in virtual patients. This finding indicates that reflection phases may not be as effective in simulation-based learning as in problem-centered instruction with text-based cases and can be explained with two contextual differences. First, information processing in simulation-based learning uses the verbal channel and the visual channel, while text-based learning only draws on the verbal channel. Second, in simulation-based learning, serial cue cases are used to gather information step-wise, whereas, in text-based learning, whole cases are used that present all data at once.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceStudents, MedicalComputer SimulationHumansKnowledgeLearningDiagnostic CompetencesMedical EducationReflection PhasesSimulation

Identifiers

PMID34620156
PMCPMC8497044
OpenAlexW3201817285

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.