↓ Skip to main content

Simulation based virtual learning environment in medical genetics counseling: an example of bridging the gap between theory and practice in medical education

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, March 2016
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
113 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
304 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Simulation based virtual learning environment in medical genetics counseling: an example of bridging the gap between theory and practice in medical education
Published in
BMC Medical Education, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0620-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guido Makransky, Mads T. Bonde, Julie S. G. Wulff, Jakob Wandall, Michelle Hood, Peter A. Creed, Iben Bache, Asli Silahtaroglu, Anne Nørremølle

Abstract

Simulation based learning environments are designed to improve the quality of medical education by allowing students to interact with patients, diagnostic laboratory procedures, and patient data in a virtual environment. However, few studies have evaluated whether simulation based learning environments increase students' knowledge, intrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy, and help them generalize from laboratory analyses to clinical practice and health decision-making. An entire class of 300 University of Copenhagen first-year undergraduate students, most with a major in medicine, received a 2-h training session in a simulation based learning environment. The main outcomes were pre- to post- changes in knowledge, intrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy, together with post-intervention evaluation of the effect of the simulation on student understanding of everyday clinical practice were demonstrated. Knowledge (Cohen's d = 0.73), intrinsic motivation (d = 0.24), and self-efficacy (d = 0.46) significantly increased from the pre- to post-test. Low knowledge students showed the greatest increases in knowledge (d = 3.35) and self-efficacy (d = 0.61), but a non-significant increase in intrinsic motivation (d = 0.22). The medium and high knowledge students showed significant increases in knowledge (d = 1.45 and 0.36, respectively), motivation (d = 0.22 and 0.31), and self-efficacy (d = 0.36 and 0.52, respectively). Additionally, 90 % of students reported a greater understanding of medical genetics, 82 % thought that medical genetics was more interesting, 93 % indicated that they were more interested and motivated, and had gained confidence by having experienced working on a case story that resembled the real working situation of a doctor, and 78 % indicated that they would feel more confident counseling a patient after the simulation. The simulation based learning environment increased students' learning, intrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy (although the strength of these effects differed depending on their pre-test knowledge), and increased the perceived relevance of medical educational activities. The results suggest that simulations can help future generations of doctors transfer new understanding of disease mechanisms gained in virtual laboratory settings into everyday clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 304 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 <1%
Unknown 303 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 12%
Student > Bachelor 36 12%
Researcher 33 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 8%
Lecturer 18 6%
Other 65 21%
Unknown 92 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 9%
Psychology 20 7%
Social Sciences 19 6%
Computer Science 18 6%
Other 80 26%
Unknown 99 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 26 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,220,641
of 23,437,201 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#118
of 3,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,187
of 301,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#2
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,437,201 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,465 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 301,798 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.