Skip to main content
Log in

Guidelines for the design of a virtual patient for psychiatric interview training

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A psychiatric diagnosis involves the physician’s ability to create an empathic interaction with the patient in order to accurately extract symptomatology (i.e., clinical manifestations). Virtual patients (VPs) can be used to train these skills but need to propose a structured and multimodal interaction situation, in order to simulate a realistic psychiatric interview. In this study we present a simulated psychiatric interview with a virtual patient suffering from major depressive disorders. We suggested some design guidelines based on psychiatry theories and medicine education standards. We evaluated our VP with user testing with 35 4th year medical students, and probed their opinion during debriefing interviews. All students showed good abilities to communicate empathetically with the VP, and managed to extract symptomatology from VP’s simulation. Students provided positive feedbacks regarding pedagogic usefulness, realism and enjoyment in the interaction, which suggests that our design guidelines are consistent and that such technologies are acceptable to medical students. To conclude this study is the first to simulate a realistic psychiatric interview and to measure both skills needed by future psychiatrists: symptomatology extraction and empathic communication. Results provide evidence for the use of VPs to complement existing tools and to train and evaluate healthcare professionals in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/mixed-reality/voice-input-in-unity.

  2. https://www.optitrack.com/motion-capture-animation/.

  3. www.dynamixyz.com.

  4. https://www.autodesk.com/products/motionbuilder/overview.

  5. https://unity3d.com/unity.

  6. https://unity3d.com/unity.

References

  1. Shea SC (2016) Psychiatric interviewing e-book: the art of understanding: a practical guide for psychiatrists, psychologists, counselors, social workers, nurses, and other mental health professionals. Elsevier Health Sciences, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  2. Silverman JJ et al (2015) Practice guidelines for the psychiatric evaluation of adults. Am J Psychiatry 172(8):798–802. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.1720501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Halpern J (2003) What is clinical empathy? J Gen Int Med 18(8):670–674. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.21017.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Davis MH (2018) Empathy: a social psychological approach. Routledge, Abingdon

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Granry J-C, Moll M-C (2019) Etat de l’art (national et international) en matière de pratiques de simulation dans le domaine de la santé. Haute Autorité de Santé, Rapport de mission, 2012. Consulté le: juill. 09, 2019. [En ligne]. Disponible sur: https://www.has-sante.fr/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-01/simulation_en_sante_-_rapport.pdf

  6. Cook DA, Erwin PJ, Triola MM (2010) Computerized virtual patients in health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Med 85(10):1589. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3181edfe13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Philip P, Bioulac S, Sauteraud A, Chaufton C, Olive J (2014) Could a virtual human be used to explore excessive daytime sleepiness in patients? Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 23(4):369–376. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres_a_00197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Auriacombe M et al (2018) Development and validation of a virtual agent to screen tobacco and alcohol use disorders. Drug Alcohol Depend 193:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.08.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Philip P et al (2017) Virtual human as a new diagnostic tool, a proof of concept study in the field of major depressive disorders. Sci Rep 7:42656. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep42656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Nordgaard J, Sass LA, Parnas J (2013) The psychiatric interview: validity, structure, and subjectivity. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 263(4):353–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-012-0366-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wing JK, Cooper JE, Sartorius N (2012) Measurement and classification of psychiatric symptoms: an instruction manual for the PSE and Catego program. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  12. American Psychiatric Association (2013) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5®). American Psychiatric Pub, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Kaplan HI, Sadock BJ (1988) Synopsis of psychiatry: behavioral sciences clinical psychiatry, 5th edn. Williams & Wilkins Co, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  14. Micoulaud-Franchi J-A et al (2018) Making psychiatric semiology great again: a semiologic, not nosologic challenge. L’Encéphale 44(4):343–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.encep.2018.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Colliver JA, Conlee MJ, Verhulst SJ, Dorsey JK (2010) Reports of the decline of empathy during medical education are greatly exaggerated: a reexamination of the research. Acad Med 85(4):588. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3181d281dc

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Deladisma AM et al (2007) Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient? Am J Surg 193(6):756–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.01.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kim SS, Kaplowitz S, Johnston MV (2004) The effects of physician empathy on patient satisfaction and compliance. Eval Health Prof 27(3):237–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278704267037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tulsky JA (2005) Interventions to enhance communication among patients, providers, and families. J Palliat Med 8(Supplement 1):s-95. https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2005.8.s-95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Consorti F, Mancuso R, Nocioni M, Piccolo A (2010) Efficacy of virtual patients in medical education: a meta-analysis of randomized studies. Comput Edu 59(3):1001–1008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bhugra D et al (2017) The WPA- lancet psychiatry commission on the future of psychiatry. Lancet Psychiatry 4(10):775–818. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2215-0366(17)30333-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tolks D et al (2016) An introduction to the inverted/flipped classroom model in education and advanced training in medicine and in the healthcare professions. GMS J Med Educ. https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Batt-Rawden SA, Chisolm MS, Anton B, Flickinger TE (2013) Teaching empathy to medical students: an updated, systematic review. Acad Med 88(8):1171. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e318299f3e3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ochs M et al (2019) Training doctors’ social skills to break bad news: evaluation of the impact of virtual environment displays on the sense of presence. J Multimodal User Interfaces 13(1):41–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12193-018-0289-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kenny P, Parsons TD, Gratch J, Rizzo AA (2008) Evaluation of Justina: a virtual patient with PTSD. In: Intelligent Virtual Agents, pp 394–408

  25. Kleinsmith A, Rivera-Gutierrez D, Finney G, Cendan J, Lok B (2015) Understanding empathy training with virtual patients. Comput Hum Behav 52:151–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Foster A et al (2016) Using virtual patients to teach empathy: a randomized controlled study to enhance medical students’ empathic communication. Simul Healthc 11(3):181. https://doi.org/10.1097/sih.0000000000000142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Oh CS, Bailenson JN, Welch GF (2018) A systematic review of social presence: definition, antecedents, and implications. Front Robot AI. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2018.00114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Huwendiek S, Leng BAD, Zary N, Fischer MR, Ruiz JG, Ellaway R (2009) Towards a typology of virtual patients. Med Teachnol 31(8):743–748. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590903124708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Oinas-Kukkonen H, Harjumaa M (2009) Persuasive systems design: key issues, process model, and system features. Commun Assoc Inf Syst. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.02428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bohil CJ, Alicea B, Biocca FA (2011) Virtual reality in neuroscience research and therapy. Nat Rev Neurosci 12(12):752–762. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hassenzahl M (2008) The interplay of beauty, goodness, and usability in interactive products. Hum-Comput Interact 19(4):319–349. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci1904_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manag Sci 46(2):186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This project was supported by the French State within the framework of the national grants LABEX BRAIN (ANR-10-LABX-43), EQUIPEX PHENOVIRT (ANR-10-EQPX-01), and IdEx Bordeaux (ANR-10-IDEX-03-02). We thank the medical students who took time to test our VP and to give their precious feedbacks. We also thank Emilien Bonhomme who participated in the development of the virtual patient.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucile Dupuy.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

:The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dupuy, L., de Sevin, E., Cassoudesalle, H. et al. Guidelines for the design of a virtual patient for psychiatric interview training. J Multimodal User Interfaces 15, 99–107 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12193-020-00338-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12193-020-00338-8

Keywords

Navigation