ArticleGMS journal for medical education2023
Medical students in their first consultation: A comparison between a simulated face-to-face and telehealth consultation to train medical consultation skills.
Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Error Rates in Technical Skills and Contextual Skills in a Large-Scale Peer-Assessed Clinical Skills Examination.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- A medical consultation simulation in a preclinical biochemistry seminar: Does training in a high-fidelity simulation practice provide an advantage over a simulation in a traditional seminar room?GMS journal for medical education · 2026Article
- Telehealth equity and access communication skills pilot simulation for practicing clinicians.PloS one · 2025Article
- Early introduction of simulation in the medical curriculum: the MedInTo perspective.Frontiers in medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: A simulated conversation between a physician and a family member, i.e., a medical conversation, was changed from a conventional face-to-face conversation (SS 2019) to a telehealth conversation (SS 2020) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The medical education conversation is part of the biochemistry seminar "From Genes to Proteins" which second semester human medicine students take. The objective of this study was to analyze to what extent the switch from face-to-face to telehealth conversations affected student satisfaction and motivation. Methodology: In the seminar, students study biochemical as well as competency-oriented content, such as how to talk to family members. In the summer semester of 2019, students were trained how to talk to their patients' family members in a traditional conversation setting with the help of lay actors in a classroom format. In the summer semester of 2020, this conversation took place under comparable conditions, but in the form of an online telehealth conversation instead. Student satisfaction and motivation were surveyed by means of an evaluation questionnaire following the seminar in both semesters. Results: Both conversation formats achieved a high level of satisfaction from students (school grade A-B). For some evaluation items, such as "realistic conversation simulation", the face-to-face conversation was perceived as more satisfying ( Conclusion: The high student satisfaction and acceptance of both didactic concepts leads to the conclusion that the simulated telehealth conversation is an adequate substitute for the simulation of a traditional face-to-face conversation with regard to the parameters that were studied.
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.