Advertisement

Challenges in Creating a Mobile Digital Tutor for Clinical Communications Training

  • Wayne ZacharyEmail author
  • Steven Bishop
  • Wally Smith
  • Janis Cannon-Bowers
  • Addison Blanda
  • Prathmesh Pethkar
  • Theresa Wilkin
  • Taylor Carpenter
  • Annika Horgan
  • Thomas Santarelli
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 785)

Abstract

Doctor-patient communication is a crucial element in effective medical care, and the striking health disparities evident in patients with Type II Diabetes may in part be caused by physicians’ difficulties in establishing effective communication with patients who differ from them racially, culturally, and economically. REPEAT (Realizing Enhanced Patient Encounters through Aiding and Training) is a digital tutor developed to help solve this problem. REPEAT teaches and coaches learners to improve their general and disparities-focused clinical communication skills using simulated encounters with computer-generated Synthetic Standardized Patients (SSPs) and augments experiential learning in virtual encounters by applying customized, context-sensitive, learner-focused scaffolding. REPEAT authoring tools enable rapid development of learning content, allowing economical transferability to other domains. Key human factors challenges and their design solution in REPEAT are discussed.

Keywords

Digital tutor Clinical communications Mobile Game-based training Intelligent tutoring Health disparities 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities of the National Institutes of Health, under award number R44MD009559. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

References

  1. 1.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report, 2017. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA, (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    World Health Organization: Diabetes Fact Sheet. Swizerland, Geneva (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gaskin, D.J., Thorpe Jr., R.J., McGinty, E.E., Bower, K., Rohde, C., Young, J.H., LaVeist, T.A., Dubay, L.: Disparities in diabetes: the nexus of race, poverty, and place. Am. J. Publ. Health 104(11), 2147–2155 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Collins, K.S., Hughes, D.L., Doty, M.M., Ives, B.L., Edwards, J.N., Tenney, K.: Diverse Communities, Common Concerns: Findings from the Commonwealth Fund 2001 Health Care Quality Survey. The Commonwealth Fund, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roter, D.L., Hall, J.A., Merisca, R., Ruehle, B., Cretin, D., Svarstad, B.: Effectiveness of interventions to improve patient compliance: a meta-analysis. Med. Care 36, 1138–1161 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Bowers, C.A.: Synthetic learning environments. In: Spector, J.M., David Merrill, M., van Merriënboer, J.J.G., Driscoll, M.P. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 3rd edn, pp. 317–328. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Bowers, C.A.: Synthetic learning environments: on developing a science of simulation, games and virtual worlds for training. In: Kozlowski, S.W.J., Salas, E. (eds.) Learning, Training and Development in Organizations, pp. 229–261. Routledge, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    VanLehn, K.: The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educ. Psychol. 46(4), 197–221 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kulik, J.A., Fletcher, J.D.: Effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems: a meta-analytic review. Rev. Educ. Res. 86(1), 42–78 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oser, R.L., Gualtieri, J.W., Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Salas, E.: Training team problem-solving skills: An event-based approach. Comput. Hum. Behav. 15, 441–462 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bruppacher, H.R., Alam, S.K., LeBlanc, V.R., Latter, D., Naik, V.N., Savoldelli, G.L., Mazer, C.D., Kurrek, M.M., Joo, H.S.: Simulation-based training improves physicians’ performance in patient care in high-stakes clinical setting of cardiac surgery. Anesthesiol. J. Am. Soc. Anesthesiol. 112(4), 985–992 (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wagner, A., Rozenblit, J.W.: Augmented reality visual guidance for spatial perception in the computer assisted surgical trainer. Simul. Ser. 49(6), 46–57 (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roter, D.L., Hall, J.A.: Doctors Talking with Patients/Patients Talking with Doctors, 2nd edn. Prager, Westport (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Williams, D.R.: Moving Upstream: How Interventions that Address the Social Determinants of Health Can Improve Health and Reduce Disparities. Plenary Lecture, Science of Eliminating Health Disparities Summit, National Institutes of Health, December 2008, National Harbor, MD (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Corbett, A.T., Koedinger, K.R., Anderson, J.R.: Intelligent tutoring systems. In: Helander, M., Landauer, T.K., Prabhu, P. (eds.) Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd edn, pp. 849–874. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    VanLehn, K.: Regulative loops, step loops and task loops. Int. J. Artif. Intell. in Educ. 26(1), 107–112 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    American Association of Medical Colleges: Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency: Curriculum Developers’ Guide (2014). https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Core%20EPA%20Curriculum%20Dev%20Guide.pdf. Accessed 3 Jan 2018
  18. 18.
    Pangaro, L.: A new vocabulary and other innovations for improving descriptive in-training evaluations. Acad. Med. 74(11), 1203–1207 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rodriguez, R.G., Pangaro, L.N.: AM last page: mapping the ACGME competencies to the RIME framework. Acad. Med. 87(12), 1781 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kalet, A., Pugnaire, M.P., Cole-Kelly, K., Janicik, R., Ferrara, E., Schwartz, M.D., Lazare, A.: Teaching communication in clinical clerkships: models from the macy initiative in health communications. Acad. Med. 79(6), 511–520 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zachary, D.A., Zachary, W., Cannon-Bowers, J., Santarelli, T.: Backstory elaboration: a method for creating realistic and individually varied cultural avatars. In: Schatz, S., Hoffman, M. (eds.) Advances in Cross-Cultural Decision Making: Proceedings of the AHFE 2016 International Conference on Cross-Cultural Decision Making (CCDM), pp. 207–217. Springer, New York (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41636-6_17Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kevan, J.M., Ryan, P.R.: Experience API: flexible, decentralized and activity-centric data collection. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 21(1), 143–149 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kitto, K., Cross, S., Waters, Z., Lupton, M.: Learning analytics beyond the LMS: the connected learning analytics toolkit. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, pp. 11–15. ACM (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wayne Zachary
    • 4
    Email author
  • Steven Bishop
    • 2
  • Wally Smith
    • 5
  • Janis Cannon-Bowers
    • 1
  • Addison Blanda
    • 1
  • Prathmesh Pethkar
    • 1
  • Theresa Wilkin
    • 1
  • Taylor Carpenter
    • 3
  • Annika Horgan
    • 3
  • Thomas Santarelli
    • 3
  1. 1.Starship Health Technologies, LLCPlymouth MeetingUSA
  2. 2.School of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal MedicineVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA
  3. 3.CHI Systems, Inc.Plymouth MeetingUSA
  4. 4.Starship Health Technologies, LLCFort WashingtonUSA
  5. 5.School of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal MedicineVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA

Personalised recommendations