ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026
Research progress on the application of virtual simulation in medical education.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical education is fundamental to developing clinical competence, directly influencing care quality and patient safety. Traditional teaching models have long faced structural limitations, including scarce physical resources and restricted clinical exposure, which hinder the training of versatile professionals needed in modern health care. Virtual simulation (VS), by providing a high-fidelity, repeatable, and low-risk learning environment, offers a promising solution to these challenges. This narrative article reviews recent applications of VS in basic medicine, clinical medicine, and nursing education. Although existing evidence supports its educational benefits, most studies rely on short-term, small-sample designs and lack evaluation of long-term clinical transfer or cost-effectiveness. Persistent issues include high device heterogeneity and insufficient integration of nontechnical skills training. Future efforts should prioritize multicenter longitudinal research, platform standardization, and the incorporation of artificial intelligence to enable personalized adaptive learning-moving VS toward a core component of medical education.
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.