Does Video-Based Patient Simulation Improve Clinical Reasoning Skills in Medical Students?
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- Enrollment
- 250
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Clinical-reasoning performance score
Study Overview
Brief Summary
This randomized controlled trial evaluates whether a digital, video-based clinical-reasoning simulation improves clinical-reasoning performance compared with conventional lecture-based teaching across multiple clinical disciplines, including orthopedics and ophthalmology.
Within each discipline, participants are randomly allocated 1:1 to an intervention group or a control group. The intervention group learns the assigned topic through an interactive, web-based simulation built on real patient video cases with structured clinical-reasoning steps. The control group receives the same learning objectives and content through a standard didactic lecture, over a comparable duration.
After the learning session, all participants complete the same set of standardized clinical scenarios, scored with a predefined rubric. The primary outcome is the post-intervention clinical-reasoning score. Secondary outcomes include diagnostic accuracy, confidence, and satisfaction.
The trial uses a shared protocol across discipline-specific cohorts to allow consistent, pre-specified comparison of simulation-based versus lecture-based instruction.
Detailed Description
Background. Clinical reasoning is a core competency across medical disciplines, yet traditional lectures offer limited interactive practice. A digital simulation using authentic patient cases may strengthen reasoning, but comparative evidence is limited.
Objective. To compare a digital, video-based clinical-reasoning simulation with conventional lecture-based teaching on clinical-reasoning performance, using a single shared design applied across discipline-specific cohorts (e.g., orthopedics, ophthalmology, paediatrics).
Design. Single-center, parallel-group, two-arm randomized controlled trial with 1:1 allocation, replicated as pre-specified cohorts by clinical discipline under one common protocol.
Participants. Eligible learners (medical students / residents) within each discipline-specific cohort at primarily Altinbas University.
Randomization. Computer-generated 1:1 randomization performed separately within each cohort; outcome assessors blinded to allocation.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Other
- Masking
- Single (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- Yes
Inclusion Criteria
- •Enrolled as a [final-year medical student / resident] in the relevant discipline (orthopedics or ophthalmology) at the participating institution
- •Completed the baseline orientation and agreed to participate
- •Available for the full learning session and the post-session assessment
Exclusion Criteria
- •Prior completion of the same simulation module or equivalent structured training on the topic
- •Did not complete the assigned learning session
- •Incomplete post-session assessment data
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Clinical-reasoning performance score
Time Frame: Immediately after the learning session (same day)
Performance on a set of standardized clinical scenarios completed after the learning session, rated with a predefined scoring rubric. Higher scores indicate better clinical-reasoning performance. Assessed separately within each discipline-specific cohort. Scored using the five-domain Clinical Reasoning Score System; total range 0-100, with higher scores indicating better clinical-reasoning performance.
Secondary Outcomes
- Diagnostic accuracy(Immediately after the learning session (same day))
- Participant confidence(Immediately after the learning session (same day))
- Participant satisfaction(Immediately after the learning session (same day))
Investigators
Sibel Zorlu Ozturk
Ophthalmologist
Altinbas University