LAUSR

and closed questions. All participating medical students were encouraged to share their experiences, concerns and suggestions regarding clinical learning through this platform anonymously. Descriptive statistics were computed, and qualitative data were analysed thematically. Approximately 28 students had VCT sessions between October 2020 and March 2021, and 19 participated in the survey. All were second-year medical students, two-thirds had one VCC teaching session and almost one-third had two sessions. When asked how they felt overall about VCC clinical skills sessions with patients compared with in-person sessions, most said they thought the experience was “worse” (74%) or “much worse” (5%) compared with in-person learning. However, most students found that the skill of learning to take the history, formulating a problem list, providing diagnostic and management advice and receiving teacher feedback by VCT was the “same as in clinic.” Students were also asked to share their positive experiences with virtual teaching sessions. Overall, they indicated that virtual teaching sessions are easier to attend; they help save time, have available resources and receive direct feedback and assessments from preceptors. They highlighted that VCT allows them to observe a patient household dynamic during each evaluation. On the other hand, the disadvantages included the lack of physical exams especially at their stage of training and that VCT relies on the quality of the technology. Finally, students mentioned that VCT provides an inadequate observation of patients' body language, and it is hard to build rapport during virtual teaching sessions.