MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392942950 · doi:10.1097/nne.0000000000001635

Virtual Reality Simulation in a Health Assessment Laboratory Course

2024· article· en· W4392942950 on OpenAlexaff
Jill Vihos, Andrea Chute, Sue Carlson, Mamta Shah, Karen Buro, Nirudika Velupillai

Bibliographic record

VenueNurse Educator · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)PsychologySelf-confidenceDistressVirtual realityConfidence intervalFidelityMedical educationApplied psychologyComputer scienceMedicineClinical psychologySocial psychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to examine the relationship between virtual reality simulation (VRS) and student satisfaction and self-confidence in a health assessment laboratory course. METHODS: Second-year students (n = 37) completed a postoperative respiratory distress scenario using Elsevier's Simulation Learning System with Virtual Reality. All participants completed the Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning Scale; a subset participated in 1:1 semistructured interviews. RESULTS: Satisfaction and self-confidence scores were strongly correlated. VRS experiences of fidelity, communication confidence and competence, learning with peers, integrated learning and critical thinking, and a safe space to learn were related to students' satisfaction and self-confidence. CONCLUSIONS: VRS experiences are correlated with high student satisfaction and self-confidence.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.436 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNurse EducatorSame topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207