MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186683744 · doi:10.7202/1077986ar

Effect of Simulation-Based Education on the Preparedness of Healthcare Professionals for the COVID-19 Pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3186683744 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marc‐André Maheu‐Cadotte, Alexandra Lapierre, Guillaume Fontaine, Tanya Mailhot, Patrick Lavoie

Bibliographic record

VenueScience of Nursing and Health Practices · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessContext (archaeology)Personal protective equipmentHealth carePandemicMedical educationData extractionPsychologySystematic reviewCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CurriculumMedicineNursingMEDLINEPedagogyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Healthcare organizations around the world have embraced simulation to prepare healthcare professionals to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, this pandemic implies additional educational challenges in rapidly designing simulation activities, while remaining compliant with health and safety measures to prevent the spread of the virus. The effect of simulation-based education in this context remains to be evaluated. Objective: The purpose of this systematic review was to describe the features and evaluate the effect of simulation activities on the preparedness of healthcare professionals and students to safely deliver care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Databases were searched up to November 2020 using index terms and keywords related to healthcare professions, simulation, and COVID-19. All learning outcomes were considered according to the Kirkpatrick model adapted by Barr et al. (2020). Reference selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed in pairs and independently. Results were synthesized using meta-analytical methods and narrative summaries. Results: 22 studies were included, 21 of which were single-group studies and 14 of those included pretest/posttest assessments. Simulation activities were mostly implemented in clinical settings using manikins for training on the use of personal protective equipment, hand hygiene, identification and management of COVID-19 patients, and work processes and patient flow. Large improvements in learning outcomes after simulation activities were reported in all studies. Discussion and conclusion: Results should be interpreted cautiously due to significant threats to the internal validity of studies and the absence of control groups. However, these findings are coherent with the overall evidence on the positive effect of simulation-based education. Future studies should include control groups if feasible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.032
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.525
GPT teacher head0.663
Teacher spread0.138 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience of Nursing and Health PracticesSame topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207