↓ Skip to main content

Student self-reported communication skills, knowledge and confidence across standardised patient, virtual and traditional clinical learning environments

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
418 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Student self-reported communication skills, knowledge and confidence across standardised patient, virtual and traditional clinical learning environments
Published in
BMC Medical Education, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0577-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Quail, Shelley B Brundage, Josh Spitalnick, Peter J Allen, Janet Beilby

Abstract

Advanced communication skills are vital for allied health professionals, yet students often have limited opportunities in which to develop them. The option of increasing clinical placement hours is unsustainable in a climate of constrained budgets, limited placement availability and increasing student numbers. Consequently, many educators are considering the potentials of alternative training methods, such as simulation. Simulations provide safe, repeatable and standardised learning environments in which students can practice a variety of clinical skills. This study investigated students' self-rated communication skill, knowledge, confidence and empathy across simulated and traditional learning environments. Undergraduate speech pathology students were randomly allocated to one of three communication partners with whom they engaged conversationally for up to 30 min: a patient in a nursing home (n = 21); an elderly trained patient actor (n = 22); or a virtual patient (n = 19). One week prior to, and again following the conversational interaction, participants completed measures of self-reported communication skill, knowledge and confidence (developed by the authors based on the Four Habit Coding Scheme), as well as the Jefferson Scale of Empathy - Health Professionals (student version). All three groups reported significantly higher communication knowledge, skills and confidence post-placement (Median d = .58), while the degree of change did not vary as a function of group membership (Median η (2)  < .01). In addition, only students interacting with a nursing home resident reported higher empathy after the placement. Students reported that conversing with the virtual patient was more challenging than conversing with a nursing home patient or actor, and students appeared to derive the same benefit from the experience. Participants self-reported higher communication skill, knowledge and confidence, though not empathy, following a brief placement in a virtual, standardised or traditional learning environment. The self-reported increases were consistent across the three placement types. It is proposed that the findings from this study provide support for the integration of more sustainable, standardised, virtual patient-based placement models into allied health training programs for the training of communication skills.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 418 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 415 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 62 15%
Student > Bachelor 56 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 10%
Researcher 26 6%
Lecturer 22 5%
Other 83 20%
Unknown 129 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 87 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 77 18%
Social Sciences 24 6%
Psychology 23 6%
Computer Science 10 2%
Other 55 13%
Unknown 142 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,311,744
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#3,147
of 3,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,358
of 297,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#76
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,326 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 297,542 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.