Cited by 210Simulation-Based Education in HealthcareInnovations in Medical EducationEmpathy and Medical Education

Effective virtual patient simulators for medical communication training: A systematic review

Open access
Lee, Jihyun, Kim, Hyungsin, Kim, Kwan Hoon, Jung, Daeun, Jowsey, Tanisha, Webster, Craig S.·2020·Medical Education

Abstract

Context: Despite the growing use of virtual patients (VPs) in medical education, few studies have explored the features and effectiveness of VP‐based medical communication skills training. We undertook a systematic review to summarise the design and evaluation of VP‐based medical communication skills training systems in order to identify features of successful cases. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched four databases for studies published between 2006 and 2018. Using a refined classification scheme, we extracted data on instructional design (scenario and instructional intervention), technological design (modality and interaction), and evaluation (user experience, learning effectiveness and evaluator). We assessed the quality of studies using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) and the QualSyst standard assessment criteria. Results: A total of 14 studies were included for review. Of these, 85.7% (n = 12) were quantitative and 71.4% (n = 10) involved undergraduate students. The most common VP training scenario was history taking followed by the delivery of bad news. Diverse instructional interventions, including tutorials, learning activities, and feedback, were embedded in the VPs. The first‐person perspective animated within‐screen size VP was a popular technological feature. Most evaluations concerned the reality of simulation (for user experience) and skill in expressing empathy (as a learning outcome). Of the eight comparative studies, half reported significant attitude or skill improvements in the VP group. The distinct features of VPs shown to be effective were well‐designed instructional interventions (eg, a pre‐activity with a protocol‐informed tutorial), and post‐activity (eg, debrief or reflection), scaffolding and human feedback, but not system feedback. Conclusions: Evidence‐based VP training can enable students to gain communication skills in a safe and affordable learning environment. Elaborate technology alone cannot guarantee effective learning, but evidence‐based instructional interventions can facilitate its optimal use and bring about better learning outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/medu.14152

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Traditional face-to-face history-taking training is resource-intensive, costly, and difficult to standardize on a large scale.

    “While traditional face-to-face history-taking training has proven effective, it is often resource-intensive, costly, and difficult to standardize on a large scale.”

    From Feasibility study of using GPT for history-taking training in medical education: a randomized clinical trial (2025) · cites this paper as [1]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says interactions with standardised patients provide realistic communication practice but pose resource and logistical challenges. It also says patient stories can be difficult to keep consistent across actors and scenarios. The paper does not specifically establish that face-to-face history-taking training is costly, difficult to standardize at large scale, or proven effective. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Clinical reasoning and communication are areas that are often challenging for medical students.

    “A key contribution of this study is the measurable improvement in clinical reasoning and communication—areas that are often challenging for medical students [1, 2].”

    From Feasibility study of using GPT for history-taking training in medical education: a randomized clinical trial (2025) · cites this paper as [1]

    The Introduction (page not available in our copy) describes medical communication as involving complex situations and explains why students receive communication training. It does not say that clinical reasoning is often challenging for medical students; a search for clinical reasoning found only a reference title, not a finding on that point. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [17]17. Preece J. Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction, 4th edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2015.
  2. [30]30. Foster A, Chaudhary N, Murphy J, Lok B, Waller J, Buckley PF. The use of simulation to teach suicide risk assessment to health profession trainees-rationale, methodology, and a proof of 13652923, 2020, 9, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/medu.14152 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [31/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License | 795
  3. [31]31. LEE Et aL. concept demonstration with a virtual patient. Acad Psychiatry. 2015;39(6):620-629.
  4. [39]39. Philpott JS. The Relative Contribution to Meaning of Verbal and Nonverbal Channels of Communication: A Meta-analysis. Master's thesis. Omaha, NE: University of Nebraska; 1983.
  5. [44]44. Jonassen DH, Campbell JP, Davidson ME. Learning with media: re- structuring the debate. Educ Technol Res Dev. 1994;42(2):31-39.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, J., Kim, H., Kim, K. H., Jung, D., Jowsey, T., & Webster, C. S.
Affiliations
  • Seoul National University (KR)
  • Smart Experience Design Graduate School of Techno Design Kookmin University Seoul South Korea
  • Florida State University (US)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
Kim, Kwan Hoon
Venue
Medical Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-05-22
Volume
54
Issue
9
Pages
786-795
ISSN
  • 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2923
OpenAlex
W3012349076
Cited by
210
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 6
FWCI
2.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medical Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF‐2017R1C1B2010469)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
Keywords
virtual patients, medical communication skills, communication skills training, instructional design, medical history, breaking bad news, empathy, debriefing, human feedback, simulation-based training, undergraduate medical students, user experience
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Communication, Education, Medical, Empathy, Humans, Learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review