ReviewCureus2024
The Evolution From Standardized to Virtual Patients in Medical Education.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- GenAI-Supported Virtual Patients in Health Care Education: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Use of artificial intelligence-enhanced virtual patients in educational approaches to medical interview training: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Development and preliminary evaluation of a virtual standardized patient system for psychiatric interview training.BMC psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Enhancing objective structured clinical examination performance through an artificial intelligence virtual patient: a proof-of-concept study.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2026Article
- Development and Preliminary Evaluation of a Conversational Agent Delivering Problem-Solving Therapy for Family Caregivers of Children With a Chronic Health Condition: Multiphase Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Voice-Enabled Virtual Patients for Interactive Training in Standardized Clinical Assessment: Mixed Methods Pilot Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Finding the right words: preparing medical students for communication on the wish for hastened death - medical students' perceptions of drama-based and online communication training.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Effect of Large Language Model-Powered Virtual Standardized Patients on History-Taking Among Undergraduate Medical Students: Propensity-Matched Cohort Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Rethinking Basic Science Teaching in Medical Education: A Viewpoint on Its Past, Present, and Future.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026Article
- A virtual patient-based training program to enhance clinical decision-making competencies in general practice residents: mixed-methods study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Tools in Psychiatric Education: Innovating While Maintaining Human Connection.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2026Article
- Developing and Validating a Coding Scheme for Clinical Reasoning in History Taking Using Generative AI-Based Virtual Patients: Systematic Text Condensation Approach.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Efficiency of artificial intelligence in identifying histological tissues from microscopic images.Anatomy & cell biology · 2026Article
- Virtual Reality for Developing Patient-facing Communication Skills in a Medical Science Graduate Education Course: A Mixed-Methods Pre-Post Study.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- Innovative Application of Chatbots in Clinical Nutrition Education: The E+DIEting_Lab Experience in University Students.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in undergraduate medical education clinical skills curricula: a scoping review of implementations since 2022.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Development and expert evaluation of a culturally adapted large language model for Malay clinical history-taking simulation: mixed methods study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review of Emotional, Cognitive, and Logistical Factors Influencing Simulated Patient Performance in Simulation-Based Education.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Review
- Application of Mixed Reality Technology in Medical Student Education: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Review
- Observational
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
Standardized patients (SPs) are widely used in medical education to teach clinical skills and provide assessments. SPs allow students to practice history taking, physical exams, and communication in controlled settings. However, SPs have limitations such as fatigue, performance variability, and the inability to simulate certain conditions, which virtual patients (VPs) can address. VPs can address these limitations and offer consistency, scalability, and adaptability. Although VPs are being implemented in research settings, they have the potential to be powerful medical education tools. Advancements in immersive technologies such as virtual reality, haptic feedback, and artificial intelligence (AI) will allow the creation of hyper-realistic, interactive training environments that mimic the complexity of real patient encounters. Medical students will be able to engage with VPs in fully immersive settings, complete with haptic feedback and AI-driven dialogue, allowing for more lifelike diagnostic and procedural experiences. The wider availability of such technologies through web services has implications for global medical education and assessment.
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.