The Perceived Effectiveness of a Suicide Assessment Virtual Simulation Module for Undergraduate Nursing Students
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundNursing students identify a lack of knowledge and clinical experience in the assessment of suicidal risk, which can negatively impact the care provided to individuals experiencing a mental health crisis. The purpose of this study was to explore the perceived effectiveness of a Suicidal Ideation – Assessment of Risk virtual simulation module for undergraduate nursing students.MethodA mixed methods explanatory sequential design study was conducted with third-year nursing students (N = 130) enrolled in a mental health nursing course from an Ontario-based university. The effectiveness of the virtual simulation was evaluated using the Simulation Effectiveness Tool-Modified (SET-M), followed by semi-structured individual interviews (n = 8).ResultsThe virtual simulation was perceived to be effective. Due to the sensitive topic of suicide, this study validated the importance of adhering to the Healthcare Standards of Best Practice 2021, specifically a structured debrief with a skilled facilitator. Qualitative findings identified increased learning, preparedness, confidence, knowledge, critical reflection, and decreased anxiety.ConclusionThis virtual simulation module reinforced the importance of providing application-based mental health assessment experiences prior to entering clinical practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it