Cited by 3Simulation-Based Education in HealthcareInnovations in Medical EducationAnatomy and Medical Technology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Interactive Virtual Patients for Medical Education in Zambia: Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Zambia is facing a severe shortage of health care workers, particularly in rural areas. Innovative educational programs and infrastructure have been established to bridge this gap; however, they encounter substantial challenges because of constraints in physical and human resources. In response to these shortcomings, strategies such as web-based and blended learning approaches have been implemented, using virtual patients (VPs) as a means to promote interactive learning at the Levy Mwanawasa Medical University (LMMU) in Zambia. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the students’ knowledge acquisition and acceptance of 2 VP medical topics as a learning tool on a Zambian higher education e-learning platform. Methods: Using a mixed methods design, we assessed knowledge acquisition using pre- and posttests. In a randomized controlled trial setting, students were assigned (1:1) to 2 medical topics (topic 1: appendicitis and topic 2: severe acute malnutrition) and then to 4 different learning tools within their respective exposure groups: VPs, textbook content, preselected e-learning materials, and self-guided internet materials. Acceptance was evaluated using a 15-item questionnaire with a 5-point Likert scale. Results: A total of 63 third- and fourth-year Bachelor of Science clinical science students participated in the study. In the severe acute malnutrition–focused group, participants demonstrated a significant increase in knowledge within the textbook group (P=.01) and the VP group (P=.01). No substantial knowledge gain was observed in the e-learning group or the self-guided internet group. For the appendicitis-focused group, no statistically significant difference in knowledge acquisition was detected among the 4 intervention groups (P=.62). The acceptance of learning materials exhibited no substantial difference between the VP medical topics and other learning materials. Conclusions: In the context of LMMU, our study found that VPs were well accepted and noninferior to traditional teaching methods. VPs have the potential to serve as an engaging learning resource and can be integrated into blended learning approaches at LMMU. However, further research is required to investigate the long-term knowledge gain and the acceptance and effectiveness of VPs in medical education. Trial Registration: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR) PACTR202211594568574; https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/TrialDisplay.aspx?TrialID=20413

Overview

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 · 10.2196/43699

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. 10.1186/s12960-017-0233-0 · DOI
  2. 10.2196/12637 · DOI
  3. 10.2196/10222 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103726 · DOI
  5. 10.2196/jmir.4141 · DOI
  6. 10.1186/s12909-022-03410-x · DOI
  7. 10.1186/s12909-020-02168-4 · DOI
  8. 10.2196/12449 · DOI
  9. 10.2196/14676 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1186/1472-6920-6-10 · DOI
  11. 10.5116/ijme.5aa3.ccf2 · DOI
  12. 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01113.x · DOI
  13. 10.3233/978-1-61499-289-9-102 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.7196/samjnew.7782 · DOI
  15. Kliegman, RM, 2019, Nelson Textbook of Pediatrics, 2-Volume Set. 21st edition
  16. Williams, NS, 2017, Bailey & Love's Short Practice of Surgery. 27th edition
  17. 10.1109/access.2019.2939467 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1186/s12909-020-1987-y · DOI
  19. 10.1186/s12909-019-1887-1 · DOI
  20. 10.1002/jdd.12045 · DOI
  21. 10.1186/s41077-019-0088-7 · DOI
  22. 10.1093/poq/nfv006 · DOI
  23. 10.1007/s11135-011-9640-9 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Horst, R., Witsch, L.-M., Hazunga, R., Namuziya, N., Syakantu, G., Ahmed, Y., Cherkaoui, O., Andreadis, P., Neuhann, F., & Barteit, S.
Affiliations
  • Heidelberg University (DE)
  • Levy Mwanawasa Medical University (ZM)
  • SolidarMed (CH)
Corresponding author
Barteit, Sandra
Venue
JMIR Medical Education
Published
2023-06-29
Volume
9
Pages
e43699
ISSN
2369-3762 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4382501983
Cited by
3
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2
FWCI
0.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Medical Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Anatomy and Medical Technology
Keywords
virtual patients, medical education, online learning, blended learning, knowledge acquisition, learner acceptance, appendicitis, severe acute malnutrition, medical students, health workforce shortage, rural health care, Zambia

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