ArticleCureus2015
Writing Technical Reports for Simulation in Education for Health Professionals: Suggested Guidelines.
Article in Cureus, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Education Research: "Simulation Sharing": Use of a Cardiac Arrest Management Course Developed for Medicine Residents Applied to Neurocritical Care Fellows.Neurology. Education · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Development and Initial Assessment of a Novel and Customized Bile Duct Simulator for Handsewn Anastomosis Training.Cureus · 2022Article
- The Development and Initial End-Point User Feedback of a 3D-Printed Adult Proximal Tibia IO Simulator.Cureus · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Patient Handover in Emergency Trauma Situations.Cureus · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Assessing the performance and satisfaction of medical residents utilizing standardized patient versus mannequin-simulated training.Advances in medical education and practice · 2017Article
- Sharing simulation-based training courses between institutions: opportunities and challenges.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Simulation is an important training tool used in a variety of influential fields. However, development of simulation scenarios - the key component of simulation - occurs in isolation; sharing of scenarios is almost non-existent. This can make simulation use a costly task in terms of the resources and time and the possible redundancy of efforts. To alleviate these issues, the goal is to strive for an open communication of practice (CoP) surrounding simulation. To facilitate this goal, this report describes a set of guidelines for writing technical reports about simulation use for educating health professionals. Using an accepted set of guidelines will allow for homogeneity when building simulation scenarios and facilitate open sharing among simulation users. In addition to optimizing simulation efforts in institutions that are currently using simulation as an educational tool, the development of such a repository may have direct implications on developing countries, where simulation is only starting to be used systematically. Our project facilitates equivalent and global access to information, knowledge, and highest-caliber education - in this context, simulation - collectively, the building blocks of optimal healthcare.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.