ReviewCureus2023
Standardized Patients in Medical Education: A Review of the Literature.
Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 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
57 citing papers in PubMed, 65 citations in OpenAlex.
- How prior spectacle prescriptions shape diagnostic behavior: evidence from a randomized field experiment on vision care in Western China.BMC health services research · 2025Trial
- A scoping review on the use of virtual patients for enhancing empathy in medical students.Medical education online · 2026Article
- Motivational interviewing training for community mental health providers: Findings and lessons learned from three related studies.PEC innovation · 2026Article
- Voice-Enabled Virtual Patients for Interactive Training in Standardized Clinical Assessment: Mixed Methods Pilot Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- What Platform Scores Miss: Multidimensional Evaluation of AI Teaching Agents in Medical Education.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Curriculum Innovation: The Impact and Benefits of Cross-Disciplinary Educational Collaboration Between a Department of Neurology and Department of Drama.Neurology. Education · 2026Article
- Hybrid Physical Examination: Integrating Peer Feedback with Standardized Patient Encounters.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- User Acceptance of an AI-Powered Medical History-Taking Training System Among Undergraduate Medical Students: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Standardized Patient vs Video Demonstration for Teaching Psychomotor Skills in Spinal Injury Management to Undergraduate Medical Students: Prospective Interventional Comparative Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Evaluating Student Communication Skills in a Simulation Setting: A Trends Analysis.Journal of dental education · 2026Article
- Game-Based Medical Education: Learning Effects of an Interdisciplinary and Interprofessional Escape Room.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- Enhancing patient interview and clinical examination training: the impact of the Simroid dental training robot.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Feasibility of Large Language Model-Based Standardized Virtual Patients to Support Clinical Decision-Making Training in Operative Dentistry: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- The application of large language models in orthopedic postgraduate education: potentials, challenges, and future prospects.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Review
- Cultural competence in United States medical education: a scoping review of implementation and evaluation practices.International journal of medical education · 2026Article
- Undergraduate Interprofessional Education: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Application of Mini-CEX combined with student-standardized patients in rehabilitation medicine residents' standardized training.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Assessment of simulated participant professional performance in health professional education: a scoping review.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026Review
- Enhancing history-taking education through GPT-4-based virtual patients and automated assessment: a study of medical student perceptions.Korean journal of medical education · 2026Article
- Organ-system-based psychiatry education in undergraduate medicine: learning outcomes and specialty choice.BMC medical education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The concept of standardized patients (SPs) was first introduced in the 1960s by Dr. Howard Barrows of the University of Southern California and has been applied in medical school education since that time. This practice has allowed medical students to practice skills on live persons who are teachers rather than on real patients, who may be endangered by their emerging skills. Previous studies supported the use of SPs but did not measure whether they improved clinical competence or students' confidence in their skills. This literature review evaluated whether current medical education literature supports or refutes the use of SPs compared to other modalities such as simulated patients (SiPs) and virtual reality (VR) in the improvement of student confidence, clinical performance, and interpersonal communication skills. The research questions posed for this review were as follows: do medical students in their first two years of education who have practiced skills using SPs have more self-confidence in their ability to perform skills on real patients than those students who did not use SPs, do medical students in their third and fourth years of medical school have higher clinical competency with sensitive patient examinations after using SPs in their first two years of medical education than those students who did not use SPs, and do medical students who have used SPs for discussing sensitive issues have better interpersonal skills when they encounter real patients in the clinical setting than those who have not used SPs? The methodology for this descriptive, systematic review of the literature was organized using a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flowchart to describe how articles were collected and synthesized to evaluate the variables under study. The results of this study revealed that students learned the most when SPs were used because they were able to teach students the skills that they needed in a safe learning environment. Medical students performing sensitive patient examinations with SPs learned not only how to perform the examinations but also how to improve their communication with patients. Students and residents reported increased confidence and clinical competence when performing new skills with SPs rather than with peer practice, virtual reality, or real patients in a clinical setting. Although the utilization of SPs has been studied in multiple ways and found to be a powerful tool in the education of undergraduate medical students and interns, there is still much study to be done to address the human needs of real patients. Gaps in this literature included small sample sizes, a lack of standardized assessment tools, and the need to include a multidisciplinary approach that addresses cultural awareness and appreciation. The authors found limited studies analyzing the effect the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had on the use of SPs in medical school education. Continued scientific inquiry in post-pandemic medical education is an essential component for dissemination as most schools have reintroduced the use of SPs, which strengthens the concept that their use is superior to the other simulation methods used when SPs were not available.
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.