Walking in a Patient’s Shoes: An Evaluation Study of Immersive Learning Using a Digital Training Intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Evidence suggests that immersive learning increases empathy and understanding of the patient experience of illness. This study evaluated a digital training intervention ‘In Their Shoes’ which immerses participants in the experience of living with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), highlighting the biopsychosocial impact. The simulation programme uses a mobile application to deliver time-based tasks and challenges over 36 hours, supplemented with telephone role-play and ‘kit’ items to open and use. This study investigated changes in IBD understanding and connection to patients, empathy and perception of job value in a group of pharmaceutical employees. Additionally, it explored experiences and impact of taking part in the intervention. Methods: A mixed methods pre-post design was utilised, with an opportunity sample of employees taking part in the training. 104 participants from sites in 12 countries completed measures at baseline and 97 post-intervention. Measures included the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire, Prosocial Job Characteristics Scale, and structured questions around IBD understanding and connection to patients. Two focus groups (N=14) were conducted regarding participants experiences of the intervention to complement an open-response question in the questionnaire (N=75). Qualitative data was analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Following the intervention, there were statistically significant increases in IBD understanding and connection to patients (p<.00025), evaluation of organisational innovation (p<.00025), empathy (d = .45) and prosocial job perceptions (d = .28). Qualitative analysis revealed more fully the transformative personal journey undertaken by participants which provided ‘eye opening’ insight into the psychosocial impact of living and working with IBD. This insight encouraged patient perspective-taking and a strong desire to promote patient advocacy and reduce stigma around chronic illness. Finally, greater organisational pride and connectivity was evident for some participants. Conclusions: An immersive training programme, focussing on the lived experience of illness, led to significant increases in disease understanding and empathy. These findings align with other literature evaluating immersive learning and the potential for increasing knowledge, empathy and motivation. The present study offers opportunities to extend this outside of the body of work focussing on healthcare practitioners and explores the benefits of using this type of learning experience within an organisational setting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".