Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30026966›Full record

ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2018

An overview of realist evaluation for simulation-based education.

Alastair C Graham, Sean McAleer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Numerical Assessment Tool to Measure Realism in Clinical Simulation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  13. Perception of Realism and Acquisition of Clinical Skills in Simulated Pediatric Dentistry Scenarios.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. A Mixed-Methods Realist Analysis of an Interdisciplinary Simulation Intervention for Psychiatry Residents.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alastair C Graham1Montagu Clinical Simulation Centre, Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Montagu Hospital, Adwick Road, Mexborough, S64 0AZ SYK England.ORCID 0000-0002-1074-8341
Sean McAleerCentre for Medical Education, The Mackenzie Building, Kirsty Semple Way, Dundee, DD2 4BF Scotland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article describes the key features of realist (realistic) evaluation and illustrates their application using, as an example, a simulation-based course for final year medical students. The use of simulation-based education (SBE) is increasing and so too is the evidence supporting its value as a powerful technique which can lead to substantial educational benefits. Accompanying these changes is a call for research into its use to be more theory-driven and to investigate both 'Did it work?' and as importantly 'Why did it work (or not)?' An evaluation methodology that is capable of answering both questions is realist evaluation. Realist evaluation is an emerging methodology that is suited to evaluating complex interventions such as SBE. The realist philosophy positions itself between positivist and constructivist paradigms and seeks to answer the question 'What works for whom, in what circumstances and why?' In seeking to answer this question, realist evaluation sets out to identify three fundamental components of an intervention, namely context, mechanism and outcome. Educational programmes work (successful outcomes) when theory-driven interventions (mechanisms) are applied to groups under appropriate conditions (context). Realist research uses a mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) approach to gathering data in order to test the proposed context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations of the intervention under investigation. Realist evaluation offers a valuable methodology for researchers investigating interventions utilising simulation-based education. By investigating and understanding the context, mechanisms and outcomes of SBE interventions, realist evaluation can provide the deeper level of understanding being called for.

Indexed as

Medical studentsRealismRealist evaluationRealistic evaluationSimulationSimulation-based education

Identifiers

PMID30026966
PMCPMC6050705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.