ArticleSociology of health & illness2026
What Counts as 'Real' in Healthcare Interaction? Examining Human/Technology Hybrid Simulation Interactions in Communication Skills Training.
Article in Sociology of health & illness, 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
Abstract
Simulated interaction is a common healthcare training tool and is increasingly technologically mediated. Although the need for clinical realism or authenticity of simulated interactions is commonly understood, less attention has been paid to their interactional realism. However, research beyond healthcare suggests that participants interact differently in simulated scenarios. This paper examines simulations conducted through the MetaHuman Live platform, where a human tutor is live-linked to an avatar using the tutor's voice and mapping their gaze and facial expressions. We use conversation analysis (CA) to analyse student nurses' interactions with this platform, identifying key areas where they differ from 'real' interactions. These are openings, closings, establishing shared knowledge, interactional progressivity and orientation to simulation platforms as an assessment tool. We suggest that features of a hybrid platform which aim to increase realism can also make interaction more complicated for learners trying to navigate between 'the person' and 'the system'. We conclude that, although our analysis suggests ways forward for the more effective integration of simulation technologies in training communication skills in healthcare, it also points to our continued need for a better sociological understanding of how interaction itself works in practice, to provide an evidential basis for design and evaluation of such simulations.
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.