MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2101815393 · doi:10.1111/j.1744-1609.2008.00108.x

Effectiveness of simulation on health profession students' knowledge, skills, confidence and satisfaction

2008· article· en· W2101815393 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Établissements canadiensKingston General HospitalQueen's University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedical educationPsychologyMedicineMathematics education

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the recent wave of interest being shown in high-fidelity simulators, they do not represent a new concept in healthcare education. Simulators have been a part of clinical education since the 1950s. The growth of patient simulation as a core educational tool has been driven by a number of factors. Declining inpatient populations, concerns for patient safety and advances in learning theory are forcing healthcare educators to look for alternatives to the traditional clinical encounter for skill acquisition for students. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to identify the best available evidence on the effectiveness of using simulated learning experiences in pre-licensure health profession education. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Types of studies: This review considered any experimental or quasi-experimental studies that addressed the effectiveness of using simulated learning experiences in pre-licensure health profession practice. In the absence of randomised controlled trials, other research designs were considered for inclusion, such as, but not limited to: non-randomised controlled trials and before-and-after studies. TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: This review included participants who were pre-licensure practitioners in nursing, medicine, and rehabilitation therapy. Types of intervention(s)/phenomena of interest: Studies that evaluated the use of human physical anatomical models with or without computer support, including whole-body or part-body simulators were included. TYPES OF OUTCOME MEASURES: Student outcomes included knowledge acquisition, skill performance, learner satisfaction, critical thinking, self-confidence and role identity. SEARCH STRATEGY: Using a defined search and retrieval method, the following databases were accessed for the period 1995-2006: Medline, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, HealthSTAR, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and ERIC. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Each paper was assessed by two independent reviewers for methodological quality prior to inclusion in the review using the standardised critical appraisal instruments for evidence of effectiveness, developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Disagreements were dealt with by consultations with a third reviewer. DATA COLLECTION: Information was extracted from each paper independently by two reviewers using the standardised data extraction tool from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Disagreements were dealt with by consultation with a third reviewer. DATA SYNTHESIS: Due to the type of designs and quality of available studies, it was not possible to pool quantitative research study results in statistical meta-analysis. As statistical pooling was not possible, the findings are presented in descriptive narrative form. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were selected for inclusion in this review including partial task trainers and high-fidelity human patient simulators. The results indicate that there is high learner satisfaction with using simulators to learn clinical skills. The studies demonstrated that human patient simulators which are used for teaching higher level skills, such as airway management, and physiological concepts are useful. While there are short-term gains in knowledge and skill performance, it is evident that performance of skills over time after initial training decline. CONCLUSION: At best, simulation can be used as an adjunct for clinical practice, not a replacement for everyday practice. Students enjoyed t he sessions and using the models purportedly makes learning easier. However, it remains unclear whether the skills learned through a simulation experience transfer into real-world settings. More research is needed to evaluate whether the skills acquired with this teaching methodology transfer to the practice setting such as the impact of simulation training on team function.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,020
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,687

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,150
Tête enseignante GPT0,506
Écart entre enseignants0,356 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle