ArticleMedical science educator2026
A Comparative Study among Medical Students Performing In-person Versus Virtual Workshop in Last Hours of Life Care.
Article in Medical science educator, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Integrating palliative care into undergraduate health education is essential for preparing future professionals to care for patients facing serious illness and at the end of life. Simulation-based learning has emerged as an effective strategy to complement limited clinical exposure, particularly during the last hours of life (LHoL), a phase requiring clinical expertise and emotional sensitivity. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of in-person versus virtual simulation workshops in improving medical students' self-perceived competency in professionalism in the context of LHoL care. Methods: A prospective, comparative pre-post study was conducted with final-year medical students at the University of Navarra. Participants were randomized to either an in-person (n=17) or virtual (n=29) simulation workshop. Both formats used standardized patients or standardized patient-based materials, structured debriefing, and targeted learning objectives. Self-perceived competencies were assessed before and after the workshop using the validated Student's Inventory of Professionalism (SIP), which evaluates seven domains: Results: Both groups showed significant improvements in overall professionalism scores post-intervention (in-person: 8.12 to 9.03, p < 0.05; virtual: 8.24 to 9.15, p < 0.05). The in-person group improved significantly across all seven domains, whereas the virtual group improved significantly in four domains but not in Conclusion: Both virtual and in-person workshops enhance medical students perceived competency in professionalism. LHoL workshops provide a valuable setting to explore emotionally intense and complex scenarios that foster professional identity development. This study also highlights the value of virtual modalities in strengthening clinical reasoning and self-reflection, although their effectiveness may be reduced in areas requiring clinical immersion and collaborative skill development.
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.