Popular Science Summary (for the whole project) In modern healthcare, several challenges exist: short patient visits, highly specialized care, and limited opportunities for education and professional development among healthcare staff. In theoretical training efforts, it can be difficult to highlight and provide opportunities to practice complex patient interactions. The overall goal of this project is to evaluate the effects of an interactive educational module that includes training with virtual patients (VP). Single training sessions rarely lead to behavioral changes in clinical practice, but concrete training with a clear connection to clinical tasks can have a better effect. In this research project, VPs will be part of an educational module at universities and colleges, where the overarching goal is for students to practice clinically relevant communication areas. Two main areas have been selected for the VP in this project: intimate partner violence and suicide risk assessment. Both of these areas are of great significance to public health and have direct relevance to clinical care, especially in psychiatry. Specific objectives of the project include exploring the user experience of the VP, examining whether the VP contributes to increased knowledge and confidence in asking questions within the chosen focus area, studying students' experiences of using the VP, how it has influenced their work with patients after graduation, and finally, examining user patterns on the VP platform. Previous research suggests that virtual patient cases can have positive effects on learning and engagement and may even be more effective than traditional education in improving clinical decision-making and critical thinking skills. VPs have been studied in various medical specialties, but there is a lack of knowledge specifically in psychiatry. In this project, researchers will evaluate the use of VPs in psychiatric training within medical, nursing, and psychology programs.
Age range
18 Years – 100 Years
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
General Self-Efficacy Scale
Timeframe: Up to two months
General Self-Efficacy - Visual Analog Scale
Timeframe: Up to two months
Level of Knowledge - Test
Timeframe: Up to two months
Level of Knowledge - Visual Analog Scale
Timeframe: Up to two months