A Virtual Simulator to Improve Weight-Related Communication Skills for Health Care Professionals: Mixed Methods Pre-Post Pilot Feasibility Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Discussing weight remains a sensitive and often avoided topic in health care, despite rising prevalence of obesity and calls for earlier, more compassionate interventions. Many health care professionals report inadequate training and low confidence to discuss weight, while patients often describe feeling stigmatized or dismissed. Digital simulation offers a promising route to build communication skills through supporting repeatable and reflective practice in a safe space. VITAL-COMS (Virtual Training and Assessment for Communication Skills) is a novel simulation tool designed to support health care professionals in navigating weight-related conversations with greater understanding and skill. Objective: This study aimed to assess the potential of VITAL-COMS as a digital simulation training tool to improve weight-related communication skills among health care professionals. Methods: A mixed-method feasibility study was conducted online via Zoom (Zoom Video Communications) between January to July 2021, with UK-based nurses, doctors, and dietitians. The intervention comprised educational videos and 2 simulated patient scenarios with real-time verbal interaction. Pre- and posttraining self-assessments of communication skills and conversation length were collected. Participants also completed a feasibility questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the feasibility questionnaire, and open-ended feedback was analyzed using content analysis. Paired-samples t tests were used to assess changes in communication skills and conversation length before and post training. Results: In total, 31 participants completed the study. There was a statistically significant improvement in self-assessed communication skills following training (mean difference=3.9; 95% CI, 2.54-5.26; t30=-5.76, P=.001, Cohen d=1.03). Mean conversation length increased significantly in both scenarios: in the female patient scenario, from 3.73 (SD 1.36) to 6.08 (SD 2.26) minutes, with a mean difference of 2.35 minutes (95% CI, 1.71-2.99; t30=7.49, P=.001, Cohen d=1.34); and in the male scenario, from 3.61 (SD 1.12) to 5.65 (SD 1.76) minutes, a mean difference of 2.03 minutes (95% CI, 1.51-2.55; t30=8.03, P=.001, Cohen d=1.44). Participants rated the simulation positively, with 97% (95% CI 90%-100%) supporting wider use in health care and 84% (95% CI 71%-97%) reporting emotional engagement. Content analysis of feedback generated two themes: (1) adapting to this form of learning and (2) recognizing the potential of simulation to support reflective, skills-based training. A minority, 13% (95% CI 1%-25%) expressed a preference for alternative learning methods. Conclusions: VITAL-COMS was feasible to implement and acceptable to a diverse group of health care professionals. Participants demonstrated significant improvements in self-assessed communication skills and patient-scenario engagement. The simulation was perceived as realistic, emotionally engaging, and well-suited for training in sensitive conversations. These findings support further development and integration of VITAL-COMS into health education programs. Next steps include the translation of the insights identified in this study to inform a tool supported by generative artificial intelligence.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».