ArticleBMC medical education2026
Enhancing compassionate communication: comparing lecture and simulation training in breaking bad news training.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Transforming challenging telephone conversations - investigating the effectiveness of an adapted ISBAR tool for delivering bad news.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDelivering bad news is a fundamental communication skill in clinical practice, with direct implications for patient satisfaction, adherence, and clinical outcomes. While lecture-based teaching builds essential theoretical knowledge, simulation-based training is increasingly valued for its potential to enhance practical communication skills, including empathy, confidence, and responsiveness to patient emotions. This study explores differences in self-reported outcomes following two instructional approaches delivered at different stages of undergraduate medical training.
methodsA quasi-experimental pre-test/post-test study was conducted at the University of Jordan with 267 medical students. Participants included 129 fifth-year students who received a lecture-based session and 138 sixth-year students who participated in simulation-based role-play. Academic year was inherently linked to instructional approach. All students completed structured self-administered questionnaires before and after the sessions assessing perceived knowledge, self-rated competence, comfort, and emotional communication domains. Paired-sample and independent-sample t-tests were used to examine within-group changes and exploratory between-group differences.
resultsBoth groups demonstrated statistically significant improvements in self-reported knowledge, competence, and comfort with BBN delivery (p < 0.001). The simulation group reported greater perceived gains in empathy (p = 0.042), recognition of emotional reactions (p = 0.005), and confidence in responding to emotional cues during difficult conversations (p < 0.001). Simulation participants also reported higher satisfaction and were more likely to recommend the training to peers.
conclusionsBoth lecture-based and simulation-based approaches were associated with improvements in students’ self-reported knowledge and comfort in delivering bad news. Simulation-based training was associated with higher perceived gains in emotional and interpersonal communication domains. These findings suggest that experiential approaches such as role-play may enhance perceived readiness in emotionally complex clinical communication.
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.