Attitude and satisfaction outcomes were mostly measured by item-by-item survey comparisons and showed generally positive but mixed results¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesisr3·q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · 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.
q2 i? Students were generally satisfied with virtual patients, but results were mixed: in 4 studies most items favored virtual patients, in 7 most items were indifferent, and in 1 study most items favored mannequin-based training. → Kononowicz AA 2019
q2 i? Some studies found diminished confidence with virtual patients, including one where more self-assessment items were scored lower in the virtual patient group. → Kononowicz AA 2019 (2)
Evidence¶
Kononowicz AA 2019¶
Kononowicz AA, Woodham LA, Edelbring S, Stathakarou N, Davies D, Saxena N, Tudor Car L, Carlstedt-Duke J, Car J, Zary N. (2019). Virtual Patient Simulations in Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration. Journal of Medical Internet Research. https://doi.org/10.2196/14676
q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Narrative synthesis of 17 satisfaction studies, all using questionnaires compared item-by-item; results were mixed across preference, indifference, and one study where mannequin-based training was better rated on most items. Not amenable to meta-analysis.
"In 4 studies, the majority of the items indicated preference for the virtual patient intervention, in comparison with lecture [63], reading assignment [67], video-based learning [89], and Web tutorial [88]. In 7 studies, most items were indifferent between the groups [53,59,62,65,66,74,92]."
Kononowicz AA 2019 (2)¶
Kononowicz AA, Woodham LA, Edelbring S, Stathakarou N, Davies D, Saxena N, Tudor Car L, Carlstedt-Duke J, Car J, Zary N. (2019). Virtual Patient Simulations in Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration. Journal of Medical Internet Research. https://doi.org/10.2196/14676
q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Narrative synthesis of 11 attitudinal-outcome studies; the review notes diminished confidence in one study despite no observable differences or better objective performance, which the authors attribute to possible disbelief in computer-based methods or anxiety about losing patient contact.
"In the study by Williams et al [77], more items related to self-assessment of competences (in dealing with ethical aspects and managing anxiety) were scored lower in the virtual patient group than in the traditional education groups."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- TBL is associated with higher satisfaction, positive attitudes and motivation versus lecture, but preferences are mixed
- Learners reported mostly positive attitudes toward flipped learning in the learner-generated-materials pronunciation course
- Comparisons of digital microscopy and light microscopy show mixed results: students rated light microscopy higher for satisfaction while digital microscopy showed higher examination averages in one study, and several studies found no significant performance differences
- In an exploratory pilot (n=8), students rated LEA's usability, Chat Mode, Quiz Mode, learning outcomes, and trust mostly positively, with Chat Mode the strongest performer
- Virtual patient simulations are at least as effective as traditional education for knowledge outcomes (pooled SMD=0.11)
- No reviewed game study measured behavioural change or patient/health-care outcomes; most measured knowledge and skills — related
- Student satisfaction with virtual patients is generally positive, with item-level comparisons dominating and some confidence exceptions — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
- Learner self-reported improvement after AI-generated virtual patient training is sometimes discordant with observed or cohort-comparison performance — related
- Most studies reporting change in attitude or behaviour rely on student self-reports, which is not a reliable method for measuring long-term changes in attitude — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.