↓ Skip to main content

The importance of seeing the patient: test-enhanced learning with standardized patients and written tests improves clinical application of knowledge

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Health Sciences Education, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
Title
The importance of seeing the patient: test-enhanced learning with standardized patients and written tests improves clinical application of knowledge
Published in
Advances in Health Sciences Education, May 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10459-012-9379-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Douglas P. Larsen, Andrew C. Butler, Amy L. Lawson, Henry L. Roediger

Abstract

Previous research has shown that repeated retrieval with written tests produces superior long-term retention compared to repeated study. However, the degree to which this increased retention transfers to clinical application has not been investigated. In addition, increased retention obtained through written testing has not been compared to other forms of testing, such as simulation testing with a standardized patient (SP). In our study, 41 medical students learned three clinical topics through three different learning activities: testing with SPs, testing using written tests, and studying a review sheet. Students were randomized in a counter-balanced fashion to engage in one learning activity per topic. They participated in four weekly testing/studying sessions to learn the material, engaging in the same activity for a given topic in each session. Six months after initial learning, they returned to take an SP test on each topic, followed by a written test on each topic 1 week later. On both forms of final testing, we found that learning through SP testing and written testing generally produced superior long-term retention compared to studying a review sheet. SP testing led to significantly better performance on the final SP test relative to written testing, but there was no significant difference between the two testing conditions on the final written test. Overall, our study shows that repeated retrieval practice with both SPs and written testing enhances long-term retention and transfer of knowledge to a simulated clinical application.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 143 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 19%
Researcher 18 12%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 13 9%
Other 34 23%
Unknown 25 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 25%
Psychology 34 23%
Social Sciences 15 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 8%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 31 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 15 April 2014.
All research outputs
#3,530,803
of 22,716,996 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#144
of 851 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,281
of 164,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,716,996 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 851 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 164,391 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.