ArticleBMC medical education2022
Effect of different teaching/learning approaches using virtual patients on student's situational interest and cognitive load: a comparative study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- DeepSeek-assisted problem-based learning for glaucoma education in an undergraduate ophthalmology clerkship: a randomized educational pilot study.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Virtual Patient Simulation Offers an Objective Assessment of CME Activity by Improving Clinical Knowledge and the Levels of Competency of Healthcare Providers.Journal of CME · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVirtual Patients (VPs) have been receiving considerable attention in medical education as an authentic learning and teaching approach. The study aimed to evaluate the effect of using different approaches of conduction of virtual patients (VPs) on students' cognitive load and situational interest.
methodsThe study is an experimental study. Two different cohorts have participated during the academic year 2019/2020 and 2020/2021. The first cohort (Group 1) was exposed to a lecture followed by an independent VPs session, and the second cohort (Group 2) was exposed to a collaborative VPs session. The situational interest and Cognitive load were compared between the two groups. All sessions are about one topic related to maxillofacial trauma.
resultsFindings showed that there was no significant difference between the median score of the situational interest at repeated time points during the Collaborative VPs (Group 2). However, in group 1, there was a significant difference between the median score of situational interest at repeated time points during independent VPs where the lowest score was found to be at the end of the session. Also, results showed that the collaborative VPs (Group 2) showed a high median score of situational interest than both lecture and independent VPs (Group 1). Furthermore, the study showed that there is no significant difference in the intrinsic cognitive load among the three sessions. However, the extraneous cognitive load was low in collaborative VPs (Group 2) than in both lecture and independent VPs sessions (Group 1).
conclusionThe use of VPs in a collaborative interactive learning activity is more effective than its use as an independent learning activity in enhancing students' situational interest and reducing cognitive load. However, giving independent VPs after the lecture with the same topic is considered a limitation of the study as this can affect the situational interest of the students by filling their gab of knowledge.
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.