MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389151890 · doi:10.5430/jct.v12n6p356

The Effects of Blended Learning Using Virtual Reality Simulation in Pediatrics-adolescent Nursing Clinical Practice

2023· article· en· W4389151890 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicHealthcare Education and Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritical thinkingCurriculumClinical PracticeBlended learningTest (biology)Instructional simulationNursingNurse educationNursing processVirtual realityMedicinePsychologyMedical educationMathematics educationComputer sciencePedagogyEducational technologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was to compare the effects of blended learning that integrates child-adolescent nursing clinical practice and virtual reality simulation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of blended learning in parallel clinical practice of child-adolescent nursing and virtual reality simulation of child-adolescent nursing by comparison of critical thinking, problem-solving processes, and clinical performance in both education groups before and after the educational intervention. The participants were 48 nursing college students. The experimental group (n=22) exposed a blended learning using virtual reality simulation, combining child-adolescent nursing clinical practice education, while the control group (n=26) received only child-adolescent nursing clinical practice curriculum course. The data collection period was from March 8 to November 26, 2021. The general characteristics of subject’s were analyzed by number, percentage, mean and standard deviation. And clinical practice fused with virtual reality simulation, that is, homogeneity verification of the blended learning education group was analyzed by x2 test and independent t-test. Whether there is a differences between pretest and posttest critical thinking tendency, problem-solving process, and clinical performance ability of the blended learning and the clinical practice education group was analyzed by independent t-test. The pretest & posttest results of each group showed statistically significant improvements in critical thinking, problem-solving processes, and clinical performance. In a comparison of the results of the two groups, the only statistically significant difference was found for critical thinking. Furthermore blended learning, combining a v-sim and a clinical nursing practice, into the nursing curriculum may contribute to the further development of nursing education.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.413 · 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