Evaluating the Instructional Design and Effect on Knowledge, Teamwork, and Skills of Technology-Enhanced Simulation-Based Training in Obstetrics in Uganda: Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training is a common strategy for improving the quality of facility-based maternity services and is often evaluated using Kirkpatrick's theoretical model. The results on the Kirkpatrick levels are closely related to the quality of the instructional design of a training program. The instructional design is generally defined as the "set of prescriptions for teaching methods to improve the quality of instruction with a goal of optimizing learning outcomes." OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the instructional design of a technology-enhanced simulation-based training in obstetrics, the reaction of participants, and the effect on knowledge, teamwork, and skills in a low-income country. METHODS: A stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial was performed in a university hospital in Kampala, Uganda, with an annual delivery volume of over 31,000. In November 2014, a medical simulation center was installed with a full-body birthing simulator (Noelle S550, Gaumard Scientific), an interactive neonate (Simon S102 Newborn CPR Simulator, Gaumard Scientific), and an audio and video recording system. Twelve local obstetricians were trained and certified as medical simulation trainers. From 2014 to 2016, training was provided to 57 residents in groups of 6 to 9 students. Descriptive statistics were calculated for ten instructional design features of the training course measured by the 42-item ID-SIM (Instructional Design of a Simulation Improved by Monitoring). The Wilcoxon signed rank test was conducted to investigate the differences in scores on knowledge, the Clinical Teamwork Scale, and medical technical skills. RESULTS: The mean scores on the ten instructional design features ranged from 54.9 (95% CI 48.5-61.3) to 84.3 (95% CI 80.9-87.6) out of 100. The highest mean score was given on the feature feedback and the lowest scores on repetitive practice and controlled environment. The overall score for the training day was 92.8 out of 100 (95% CI 89.5-96.1). Knowledge improved significantly, with a test score of 63.4% (95% CI 60.7-66.1) before and 78.9% (95% CI 76.8-81.1) after the training (P<.001). The overall score on the 10-point Clinical Teamwork Scale was 6.0 (95% CI 4.4-7.6) before and 5.9 (95% CI 4.5-7.2) after the training (P=.78). Medical technical skills were scored at 55.5% (95% CI 47.2-63.8) before and 65.6% (95% CI 56.5-74.7) after training (P=.08). CONCLUSIONS: Most instructional design features of a technology-enhanced simulation-based training in obstetrics in a low-income country were scored high, although intervals were large. The overall score for the training day was high, and knowledge did improve after the training program, but no changes in teamwork and (most) medical technical skills were found. The lowest-scored instructional design features may be improved to achieve further learning aims. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN98617255; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN98617255. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s12884-020-03050-3.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".