Claims

Virtual patient simulations are at least as effective as traditional education for knowledge outcomes (pooled SMD=0.11)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3
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.

q3 i? Pooled analysis of randomized trials comparing virtual patients with traditional education shows no clear knowledge advantage (SMD=0.11, 95% CI −0.17 to 0.39). → Kononowicz AA 2019

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

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Random-effects meta-analysis of trials comparing virtual patients with traditional education for knowledge outcomes; the pooled SMD=0.11 with CI crossing zero suggests "virtual patient interventions are as efficient as traditional education". High heterogeneity (I2=74%).

"The pooled effect for knowledge outcomes (SMD=0.11, 95% CI −0.17 to 0.39, I2=74%, n=927; Figure 2) suggests that virtual patient interventions are as efficient as traditional education."

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.