Scholarlink

Background <p>Effective clinical communication is a core component of patient-centered care. Immersive learning technologies, including virtual patients, virtual reality, and augmented reality, are increasingly used to train clinical communication skills in undergraduate health professions education. However, the existing evidence is fragmented and methodologically heterogeneous. This umbrella review synthesizes review-level evidence on immersive technologies and virtual patients for developing clinical communication skills in undergraduate health professions education and explores barriers to curricular integration and key research gaps.</p> Methods <p>An umbrella review of systematic reviews (with or without meta-analysis) was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Searches were performed in PubMed, ScienceDirect, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library. Eligible reviews examined immersive technologies (e.g., VR, AR, MR, XR, virtual patients) targeting clinical communication skills in undergraduate learners. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR-2.</p> <p>No pooled meta-analysis was feasible because of substantial heterogeneity in interventions, comparison conditions, and outcome measures.</p> Results <p>Nine systematic reviews were included. All were rated as critically low in methodological quality, which limits confidence in the conclusions that can be drawn. Across reviews, immersive technologies were reported as potentially beneficial for short-term communication performance, learner engagement, and perceived confidence, particularly in comparison with no intervention or some traditional teaching formats. However, evidence regarding long-term retention, empathy development, non-verbal communication, and transfer to clinical practice remained inconsistent. Substantial heterogeneity in intervention design, outcome measures, and feedback structures limited comparability across reviews.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Teaching clinical communication skills through virtual patient-based learning: an umbrella review of systematic reviews

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月13日

查看全文
  • Matthias Kalmring,
  • Sabine Chmelar,
  • Philipp Greimel,
  • Manuel Kaider,
  • Christoph Lang,
  • Benjamin Roszipal

摘要

Background

Effective clinical communication is a core component of patient-centered care. Immersive learning technologies, including virtual patients, virtual reality, and augmented reality, are increasingly used to train clinical communication skills in undergraduate health professions education. However, the existing evidence is fragmented and methodologically heterogeneous. This umbrella review synthesizes review-level evidence on immersive technologies and virtual patients for developing clinical communication skills in undergraduate health professions education and explores barriers to curricular integration and key research gaps.

Methods

An umbrella review of systematic reviews (with or without meta-analysis) was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Searches were performed in PubMed, ScienceDirect, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library. Eligible reviews examined immersive technologies (e.g., VR, AR, MR, XR, virtual patients) targeting clinical communication skills in undergraduate learners. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR-2.

No pooled meta-analysis was feasible because of substantial heterogeneity in interventions, comparison conditions, and outcome measures.

Results

Nine systematic reviews were included. All were rated as critically low in methodological quality, which limits confidence in the conclusions that can be drawn. Across reviews, immersive technologies were reported as potentially beneficial for short-term communication performance, learner engagement, and perceived confidence, particularly in comparison with no intervention or some traditional teaching formats. However, evidence regarding long-term retention, empathy development, non-verbal communication, and transfer to clinical practice remained inconsistent. Substantial heterogeneity in intervention design, outcome measures, and feedback structures limited comparability across reviews.