ArticleBMC medical education2026
Integrating Mini-CEX into a four-stage virtual simulation platform for clinical skills training: development and student evaluation.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVirtual simulation in medical education is often fragmented, lacking a continuous pathway from theory to clinical practice. The Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) offers a competency-based assessment framework that could address this gap. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a four-stage virtual simulation teaching platform integrating the Mini-CEX framework for clinical medicine training.
methodsThe four-stage platform (theoretical instruction, faculty demonstration, virtual simulation practice, bedside training) was developed and implemented with 120 final-year clinical medicine interns. A 15-item questionnaire, developed by the research team, assessed students’ learning experiences (10 items; 10-point Likert scale) and the platform’s functional demands (5 items; 0–1 scale). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (mean, SD) in SPSS 26.0.
resultsStudent acceptance of the model was high, with mean scores for all experience items exceeding 7.1. The highest-rated aspects were flexibility in using fragmented time (8.3 ± 0.5) and platform ease of use (8.3 ± 0.3). The most desired platform functions were access to course materials (0.82) and assessment information (0.80).
conclusionThe Mini-CEX-oriented four-stage virtual simulation platform is a feasible and well-accepted model that effectively integrates clinical knowledge and skills training. It provides a structured pathway for competency development, supporting its potential for broader implementation in medical education reform.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.