Claims

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-synthesis r3 · 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

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.