Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39525234›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

The Evolution From Standardized to Virtual Patients in Medical Education.

Allan Hamilton, Allyson Molzahn, Kyle McLemore

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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 · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Observational
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

3 authors.

Allan HamiltonSurgery, University of Arizona, Tucson, USA.
Allyson MolzahnArizona Simulation Technology and Education Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, USA.
Kyle McLemoreArtificial Intelligence Division in Simulation, Education, and Training, University of Arizona, Tucson, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

holographyhumanoid animatronicsimmersive realitymedical educationstandardized patientvirtual realityvirtual standardized patient

Identifiers

PMID39525234
PMCPMC11549952

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.