Novel VR tool assesses bias and discrimination in clinical decision-making among healthcare practitioners, suggesting immersive methods may enhance training.
Background Biases held by healthcare practitioners can shape clinical interactions, leading to discrimination and poor patient outcomes. Traditional methods, such as vignettes or self-report measures, often lack ecological validity. Objective We evaluated a novel VR simulation designed to explore bias and discrimination in clinical decision-making. Methods Thirty-five healthcare practitioners across 14 NHS trusts completed an in-person VR simulation and provided feedback on realism, immersion, and usability via surveys and open-ended responses. Patients in the simulation had intersecting sociodemographic characteristics (race, gender, migration status). Results Most participants rated the VR environment as at least moderately realistic (88.6%), with 42.9% rating it very or extremely realistic. Nearly half (45.7%) reported consistency with real-world experience. Open-text feedback highlighted strengths in realism, immersion, and educational potential, with suggestions to improve dialogue flexibility. Conclusions VR is a feasible, immersive, and scalable tool for investigating bias in clinical decision-making.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chui et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: