The effectiveness of scenario-based learning to develop patient safety behavior in first year nursing students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine the effect of scenario-based learning (SBL) compared to traditional demonstration method on the development of patient safety behavior in first year nursing students. During the 2016-2017 academic year, the Fundamentals of Nursing course curriculum contained the teaching of demonstration method (n=168). In the academic year 2017-2018 was performed with SBL method in the same context (n=183). Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) that assesses the same three skills was implemented in both academic terms to provide standardization so that students could evaluated in terms of patient safety competency. It was found that students' performance of some of the steps assessed were not consistently between the demonstration and SBL methods across the three skills. There was a statistically significant difference between demonstration method and SBL method for students' performing the skill steps related to patient safety in intramuscular injection (p<0.05) Our results suggest that the integration of SBL into the nursing skills training may be used as a method of teaching in order to the development of patient safety skills.
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 | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".