Technology “Synthetic patient” and development of Surgical-Case-Simulator web application

Objective. To analyze the current state and prospects for the application of Synthetic Patient technology in medical education, and to develop the Surgical-Case-Simulator web application.

Materials and methods. A systematic search of research publications was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for the period of 2010–2025 using keywords: synthetic patients, virtual patients, medical education, artificial intelligence, communication skills training. 50 most relevant studies analyzed formed the basis for the original development of the Surgical-Case-Simulator web application.

Results. Synthetic patient technology has evolved from simple game-based simulations to sophisticated systems based on generative artificial intelligence (AI). Modern platforms using large language models, voice cloning, and realistic avatars enable the creation of scalable solutions for the training process. Studies show that the use of virtual patients increases learners’ confidence in further communication with real patients, and improves standardized assessment of communication skills. The emergence of open-source developments such as Surgical-Case-Simulator demonstrates the accessibility and practical feasibility of AI simulators for a wide range of educational institutions.

Conclusion. Synthetic patients represent a promising direction in medical education. The optimal approach is their integration into existing programs as a complement to traditional methods. Further research is needed for evaluation of comparative efficacy, and solving ethical issues of implementing AI technologies.

1. Bugubaeva M, Kalmatov RK, Abbas SA, Tursunova V, Muratova N. Multidisciplinary University Virtual Clinic - DIMEDUS in Teaching Students of the International Medical Faculty of Osh State University. Virtual Technologies in Medicine. 2022;(3):1483. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.46594/2687-0037_2022_3_1483

2. Awada IA, Sorici A, Dragoi M, Florea AM, Scafa-Udriste A. Virtual patient: architecture of an educational web platform for the assessment of consultation and diagnosing skills of medical students. In: ICERI2022 Proceedings. Seville, Spain: IATED; 2022:4880-4889. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2022.2074

3. Deardorff DK, Arasaratnam-Smith LA. Intercultural competence in higher education: International approaches, assessment and application. London: Routledge; 2017. 312 p.

4. Wallace P. Following the threads of an innovation: the history of standardized patients in medical education. Caduceus. 1997;13(2):5-28.

5. Beyer-Berjot L, Patel V, Sirimanna P, Hashimoto DA. Implementation of a Surgical Simulation Care Pathway Approach to Training in Emergency Abdominal Surgery. World J Surg. 2020;44(3):704-712. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05242-1

6. Søreide K, Thorsen K, Søreide JA. Strategies to improve the outcome of emergency surgery for perforated peptic ulcer. Br J Surg. 2014;101(1):e51-e64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9368

7. Lau WY, Fan ST, Chu KW, Yip W, Yuen WK, Wong KK. Influence of surgeons’ experience on postoperative sepsis. Am J Surg. 1988;155(2):322-326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(88)80724-4

8. Reznick RK, MacRae H. Teaching surgical skills—changes in the wind. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(25):2664-2669. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra054785

9. Barrows HS. An overview of the uses of standardized patients for teaching and evaluating clinical skills. Acad Med. 1993;68(6):443-451. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199306000-00002

10. Cleland JA, Abe K, Rethans JJ. The use of simulated patients in medical education: AMEE Guide No 42. Med Teach. 2009;31(6):477-486. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590903002821

11. Lewis KL, Bohnert CA, Gammon WL, Hölzer H, Lyman L, Smith C, et al. The Association of Standardized Patient Educators (ASPE) Standards of Best Practice (SOBP). Adv Simul (Lond). 2017;2:10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-017-0043-4

12. Gaba DM. The future vision of simulation in health care. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13 Suppl 1:i2-i10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2004.009878

13. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, Scalese RJ. A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003–2009. Med Educ. 2010;44(1):50-63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03547.x

14. Huwendiek S, De Leng BA, Zary N, Fischer MR, Ruiz JG, Ellaway R. Towards a typology of virtual patients. Med Teach. 2009;31(8):743-748. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590903124708

15. Open AI. GPT-4 Technical Report. arXiv. 2023:2303.08774. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.08774

16. Google DeepMind. Gemini: A Family of Highly Capable Multimodal Models. arXiv. 2023:2312.11805. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.11805

17. van den Oord A, Dieleman S, Zen H, Vinyals O, Graves A, Kalchbrenner N, et al. WaveNet: A Generative Model for Raw Audio. arXiv. 2016:1609.03499. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1609.03499

18. Thies J, Zollhöfer M, Stamminger M, Theobalt C, Nießner M. Face2Face: Real-time Face Capture and Reenactment of RGB Videos. Proc IEEE Conf Comput Vis Pattern Recognit. 2016;2387-2395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2016.262

19. Bickmore TW, Pfeifer LM, Byron D, Forsythe S, Henault LE, Jack BW, et al. Usability of conversational agents by patients with inadequate health literacy: evidence from two clinical trials. J Health Commun. 2010;15 Suppl 2:197-210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2010.499991

20. Laranjo L, Dunn AG, Tong HL, Kocaballi AB, Chen J, Bashir R, et al. Conversational agents in healthcare: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(9):1248-1258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocy072

21. Kononowicz AA, Woodham LA, Edelbring S, Stathakarou N, Davies D, Saxena N, et al. Virtual patient simulations in health professions education: systematic review and meta-analysis by the digital health education collaboration. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(7):e14676. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/14676

22. Consorti F, Mancuso R, Nocioni M, Piccolo A. Efficacy of virtual patients in medical education: A meta-analysis of randomized studies. Comput Educ. 2012;59(3):1001-1008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.017

23. Surgical-Case-Simulator-2. GitHub repository; 2026. [date of access 2026 April 04]. Available from: https://surgical-sim-arjun-2026.netlify.app

24. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7

25. Rajkomar A, Dean J, Kohane I. Machine learning in medicine. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(14):1347-1358. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1814259

26. Satava RM. Virtual reality surgical simulator. Surg Endosc. 1993;7(3):203-205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00594110

27. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’Brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg. 2002;236(4):458-464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200210000-00008

28. Ellaway R, Candler C, Greene P, Smothers V. An architectural model for MedBiquitous virtual patients. Med Teach. 2006;28(8):691-694.

29. Cook DA, Erwin PJ, Triola MM. Computerized virtual patients in health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Med. 2010;85(10):1589-1602. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181edfe13

30. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27(1):10-28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590500046924

31. Ziv A, Wolpe PR, Small SD, Glick S. Simulation-based medical education: an ethical imperative. Acad Med. 2003;78(8):783-788. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200308000-00006

32. Poulton T, Conradi E, Kavia S, Round J, Hilton S. The replacement of ‘paper’ cases by interactive online virtual patients in problem-based learning. Med Teach. 2009;31(8):752-758. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590903141082

33. Kenny P, Parsons TD, Gratch J, Leuski A, Rizzo AA. Virtual patients for clinical therapist skills training. Intelligent Virtual Agents. 2007;4722:197-210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74997-4_19

34. Woolf K, Potts HW, McManus IC. Ethnicity and academic performance in UK trained doctors and medical students: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2011;342:d901. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d901

35. Sezer B, Sezer TA, Tasdelen Teker G, Elcin M. Developing a virtual patient: design, usability, and learning effect in communication skills training. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):860. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04860-7

36. Oliven A, Nave R, Baruch A. Long experience with a web-based, interactive, conversational virtual patient case simulation for medical students’ evaluation: comparison with oral examination. Med Educ Online. 2021;26(1):1946896. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2021.1946896

37. Furlan R, Gatti M, Menè R, Shiffer D. A Natural Language Processing-Based Virtual Patient Simulator and Intelligent Tutoring System for the Clinical Diagnostic Process: Simulator Development and Case Study. JMIR Med Inform. 2021;9(9):e24073. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/24073

38. Shin TH, Klingler M, Han AY. Efficacy of Virtual Case-Based General Surgery Clerkship Curriculum During COVID-19 Distancing. Med Sci Educ. 2021;31(1):303-310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-01126-5

39. Chao TN, Frost AS, Brody RM, Byrnes YM, Cannady SB. Creation of an interactive virtual surgical rotation for undergraduate medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Surg Educ. 2021;78(2):346-350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.06.039

40. Law AK, Hung KK, James KS, Kelly AM, Graham CA. Virtual patient simulation in undergraduate emergency medicine education during COVID-19: Randomized controlled trial. Hong Kong J Emerg Med. 2023;30(4):235-243. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10249079231189376

41. Tran MT, Ahmad M, Patel K, Argyriou O, Davies AH. Comparing virtual reality and simulation to teach the assessment and management of acute surgical scenarios: A pilot study. Health Sci Rep. 2024;7(8):e2245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.2245

42. Birrenbach T, Stuber R, Müller C, Sutter PM, Hautz WE. Virtual reality simulation to enhance advanced trauma life support trainings – a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):645. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05645-2

43. Bitska IV, Hvozdetska HS, Bulbuk O, Glovyak VG. Experience of simulation training using avatars. Art of Medicine. 2024;29(1):188-192. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21802/artm.2024.1.29.188

44. Bruce N, Smith C, Irvine LG. FTP4.2 Keeping it Simple: An Ongoing Near-Peer Teaching Programme Success for Surgical Skills and Simulation. Br J Surg. 2023;110 Suppl 7:znad241.366. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znad241.366

45. Gutiérrez Maquilón R, Uhl JC, Schrom-Feiertag H, Tscheligi M. Integrating GPT-Based AI into Virtual Patients to Facilitate Communication Training Among Medical First Responders: Usability Study of Mixed Reality Simulation. JMIR Form Res. 2024;8:e58623. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/58623

46. Weisman D, Sugarman A, Huang Y, Gelberg L, Ganz PA. Development of a GPT-4-Powered Virtual Simulated Patient and Communication Training Platform for Medical Students to Practice Discussing Abnormal Mammogram Results With Patients: Multiphase Study. JMIR Form Res. 2025;9:e65670. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/65670

47. Potter L, Jefferies C. Enhancing communication and clinical reasoning in medical education: Building virtual patients with generative AI. Future Healthc J. 2024;11(3):100043. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fhj.2024.100043

48. Chu SN, Goodell AJ. Synthetic Patients: Simulating Difficult Conversations with Multimodal Generative AI for Medical Education. arXiv. 2024:2405.19941. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.19941

49. Sardesai N, Russo P, Martin J, Sardesai A. Utilizing generative conversational artificial intelligence to create simulated patient encounters: a pilot study for anaesthesia training. Postgrad Med J. 2024;100(1188):761-765. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/postmj/qgad137

50. Comulada WS, Ganz PA, Huang Y, Weisman D, Sugarman A. A Pilot Test of an AI Voice-Driven Simulation With Feedback for Medical Students to Practice Discussing Diagnostic Mammogram Results With Patients. Cureus. 2025;17(1):e95606. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.95606