Students’ and tutors’ experiences of remote ‘student–patient’ consultations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Remote consulting has become part of the medical student clinical experience in primary care, but little research exists regarding the impact on learning. To describe the experiences of General Practitioner (GP) educators and medical students in using student-led remote consultations as an educational tool. A qualitative, explorative study conducted at four UK medical schools. GP educators and medical students were purposively sampled and interviewed. Nine themes arose: practical application, autonomy, heuristics, safety, triage of undifferentiated patients, clinical reasoning, patient inclusion in student education, student–patient interaction, and student–doctor interaction. Remote consulting has become part of the clinical placement experience. This has been found to expose students to a wider variety of clinical presentations. Verbal communication, history-taking, triage, and clinical reasoning skills were practised through remote consulting, but examination skills development was lacking. Students found building rapport more challenging, although this was mitigated by having more time with patients. Greater clinical risk was perceived in remote consulting, which had potential to negatively impact students’ psychological safety. Frequent debriefs could ameliorate this risk and positively impact student–doctor relationships. Student autonomy and independence increased due to greater participation and responsibility. Pre-selection of patients could be helpful but had potential to expose students to lower complexity patients. Practice pointsRemote consulting confers unique educational benefits.Remote consulting can help develop history-taking and communication skills, as well as clinical reasoning skills.The psychological safety of the student and the supervisory risk of the tutor can be impacted by remote consulting, but frequent debriefs between the student and tutor can help mitigate this risk.Learning how to conduct remote, and face-to-face consultations is important in medical education. Practice points Remote consulting confers unique educational benefits. Remote consulting can help develop history-taking and communication skills, as well as clinical reasoning skills. The psychological safety of the student and the supervisory risk of the tutor can be impacted by remote consulting, but frequent debriefs between the student and tutor can help mitigate this risk. Learning how to conduct remote, and face-to-face consultations is important in medical education.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".