International journal of medical education · 2026
Linear virtual patients versus student role-plays in teaching patient-centeredness: a mixed-method study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pers Michał, Kupis Robert, Kononowicz Andrzej A, Cebula Grzegorz, Szopa Magdalena
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study is aimed to assess differences in patient-centered attitudes between students using linear virtual patients focused on the patient's perspective and those participating in role-play, compare satisfaction with the methods, and explore students' perceptions.
METHODS: A mixed-methods study was conducted among third-year medical students attending a communication course. Students were randomly allocated to either the virtual patient or the role-play group. In total, 122 students participated. Patient-centered attitudes were assessed before and after the intervention using the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale. Satisfaction was measured using a 7-point questionnaire. Six students participated in semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using nonparametric tests and equivalence testing, while qualitative were analyzed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: No differences were observed between the groups in patient-centered attitudes either before or after the intervention. Equivalence testing indicated that outcomes for both teaching methods fell within a predefined equivalence margin of 0.5 points on the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale. Students in the role-play group reported higher satisfaction (role-play: median 5.65, IQR = 5.00-6.09; virtual patients: median 5.06, IQR = 4.24-5.62; p = .001). Qualitative interviews revealed that students valued role-play for interpersonal engagement, virtual patients were appreciated for reducing stress and supporting reflective learning.
CONCLUSIONS: Methods produced equivalent effects on patient-centered attitudes. Although students expressed a preference for role-play due to its realism, they recognized the reflective and low-stress advantages of virtual patients. Future research should explore hybrid approaches.
METHODS: A mixed-methods study was conducted among third-year medical students attending a communication course. Students were randomly allocated to either the virtual patient or the role-play group. In total, 122 students participated. Patient-centered attitudes were assessed before and after the intervention using the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale. Satisfaction was measured using a 7-point questionnaire. Six students participated in semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using nonparametric tests and equivalence testing, while qualitative were analyzed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: No differences were observed between the groups in patient-centered attitudes either before or after the intervention. Equivalence testing indicated that outcomes for both teaching methods fell within a predefined equivalence margin of 0.5 points on the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale. Students in the role-play group reported higher satisfaction (role-play: median 5.65, IQR = 5.00-6.09; virtual patients: median 5.06, IQR = 4.24-5.62; p = .001). Qualitative interviews revealed that students valued role-play for interpersonal engagement, virtual patients were appreciated for reducing stress and supporting reflective learning.
CONCLUSIONS: Methods produced equivalent effects on patient-centered attitudes. Although students expressed a preference for role-play due to its realism, they recognized the reflective and low-stress advantages of virtual patients. Future research should explore hybrid approaches.