Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33224323›Full record

ArticlePharmacy practice

Training and standardization of simulated patients for multicentre studies in clinical pharmacy education.

Karina A Resende, Afonso M Cavaco, Márcia D Luna-Leite, Bianca R Acacio, Núbia N Pinto, Maria D Neta, Angelita C Melo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Feasibility of using simulated patients for onsite structured practice feedback in Jordanian community pharmacy settings.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors.

Karina A ResendeMSc. Federal University of São João Del-Rei. Divinópolis, MG (Brazil). karinaresendeufsj@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7812-7042
Afonso M CavacoPhD. Associate Professor in Social Pharmacy. Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Lisbon. Lisbon (Portugal). acavaco@ff.ulisboa.pt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8466-0484
Márcia D Luna-LeitePhD. Foundation for Scientific and Technological Development in Health (FIOTEC). Rio de Janeiro, RJ (Brasil). marcia.angeles@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2084-8733
Bianca R AcacioMSc. Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul. Pioneiros, MS (Brasil). bianca.r.acacio@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2643-1170
Núbia N PintoFederal University of São João Del-Rei. Divinópolis, MG (Brazil). nubiia.naiiara@outlook.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5626-2569
Maria D NetaMSc. Federal University of Piauí. Teresina, PI (Brasil) mrdeusa@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-4541
Angelita C MeloPhD. Associate Professor in Clinical Pharmacy. Federal University of São João Del-Rei. Divinópolis, MG (Brazil). angelitamelo@ufsj.edu.br.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2714-7171

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the training and standardization methods of multiple simulated patients (SPs) performing a single scenario in a multicenter study.

methodsA prospective quasi-experimental study, using a multicenter approach, evaluated the performance of five different individuals with the same biotype during a simulation session in a high-fidelity environment. The SPs training and standardization process consisted of four steps and six web or face-to-face mediated: Step 1: simulation scenario design and pilot test. Step 2: SPs selection, recruitment and beginning training (Session 1: performance instructions and memorization request.) Session 2: check the SPs' performances and adjustments). Step 3 and session 3: training role-play and performance's evaluation. Step 4: SPs' standardization and performances' evaluation (Sessions 4 and 5: first and second rounds of SPs' standardization assessment. Session 6: Global training and standardization evaluation. SPs performance consistency was estimated using Cronbach's alpha and ICC.

resultsIn the evaluation of training results, the Maastricht Simulated Patient Assessment dimensions of SPs performances "It seems authentic", "Can be a real patient" and "Answered questions naturally", presented "moderate or complete agreement" of all evaluators. The dimensions "Seems to retain information unnecessarily", "Remains in his/her role all the time", "Challenges/tests the student", and "Simulates physical complaints in an unrealistic way" presented "moderate or complete disagreement" in all evaluations. The SPs "Appearance fits the role" showed "moderate or complete agreement" in most evaluations. In the second round of evaluations, the SPs had better performance than the first ones. This could indicate the training process's had good influence on SPs performances. The Cronbach's alpha in the second assessment was better than the first (varied from 0.699 to 0.978). The same improvement occurred in the second round of intraclass correlation coefficient that was between 0.424 and 0.978. The SPs were satisfied with the training method and standardization process. They could perceive improvement on their role-play authenticity.

conclusionsThe SPs training and standardization process revealed good SPs reliability and simulation reproducibility, demonstrating to be a feasible method for SPs standardization in multicenter studies. The Maastricht Simulated Patient Assessment was regarded as missing the assessment of the information consistency between the simulation script and the SPs provision.

Indexed as

BrazilClinical CompetenceClinical Decision-MakingEducationEducational MeasurementPatient SimulationPharmacistsPharmacyReproducibility of ResultsSimulation Training

Identifiers

PMID33224323
PMCPMC7672484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.