Included studies used a varied range of simulation modalities, from Deaf standardized patients to VR with manipulated audio and 360 video¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-31 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? The six included studies employed standardised patients (face-to-face or on Zoom), a CD-ROM virtual patient, VR with immersive headset and manipulated audio, and 360 video usable with or without headsets. → Terry Julia 2025
Evidence¶
Terry Julia 2025¶
Terry Julia, Wilks Rachel, Davies Joanne. (2025). Simulated learning interventions to improve communication and practice with deaf and hard of hearing patients: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis. Advances in Health Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-025-10452-5
q3 · i? · review · r3
Qualitative synthesis of the six included studies' intervention characteristics, reported in the Results section under characteristics of simulation intervention. The synthesis lists standardised patient arrangements, a filmed CD-ROM scenario, "a VR experience with an immersive headset and manipulated audio", and computer-based 360 video transferable to headsets.
"The types of simulation described in the retrieved studies varied. Simulations with or about Deaf patients included the use of standardised patients played by Deaf individuals in a face-to-face setting"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Only six studies of simulation-based education about D/deaf patient experiences met inclusion criteria, indicating a paucity of evidence — related
- Two included studies were Deaf-led or user-centred, developing simulation content from data gathered with Deaf communities from the start — related
- Included studies reported improved comfort, confidence and empathy, but used no standardised outcome measures — related
- Only a minority of included trials used AR or mixed reality; roughly 88% evaluated purely VR simulations — related
- Response-to-stimulus writing activities were the most frequently used pedagogical method across included studies — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.