Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33293391›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Baccalaureate nursing students' experiences with high-fidelity simulation: protocol for a qualitative systematic review.

Yuxuan Zhu, Cong Geng, Xianbo Pei, Xiaoli Chen

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06722248 (Exploring Nursing Students' Experience and Attitudes Towards High Fidelity Simulation-based Learning Approach in Maternal and Infant Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

NCT06722248 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Exploring Nursing Students' Experience and Attitudes Towards High Fidelity Simulation-based Learning Approach in Maternal and Infant Care: A Mixed Method Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe University of Hong KongRan2025 to 2027Enrolled158ConditionsHigh Fidelity Simulation TrainingArmshigh fidelity simulation-based training, conventional training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Yuxuan Zhu *School of Health Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Cong Geng *School of Health Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9122-248X
Xianbo PeiSchool of Health Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China chenxl72@whu.edu.cn peixb@whu.edu.cn.
Xiaoli ChenSchool of Health Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China chenxl72@whu.edu.cn peixb@whu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHigh-fidelity simulation (HFS) can bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and nursing practice and improve safety and quality of patient care in baccalaureate nursing education. Although inconsistent assessment instruments or lack of high-quality research designs affect the strength of the evidence and limit the generalisability of the results, quantitative studies generally demonstrate the effectiveness of HFS in baccalaureate nursing education. Synthesis of the existing evidence of baccalaureate nursing students' experiences with HFS is crucial for the improvement and revision of simulation design and teaching. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive search for qualitative studies on baccalaureate nursing students' experiences with HFS will be conducted in the following databases: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, ProQuest, Web of Science, PsycINFO, the Cochrane library, China Biology Medicine disc, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals. This review considered studies reported in English or Chinese, and studies that were conducted between January 2000 and December 2019 in view of the launch of International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning. The literature search will be conducted by two independent reviewers, and any disagreement will be adjudicated by discussion or with a third reviewer. The two independent reviewers will use the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research to assess the methodological validity, following which the JBI standardised data extraction tools will be used to extract relevant data. The JBI meta-aggregation method will be subsequently used to synthesise the data, eventually forming themes, categories and synthesised findings. The final synthesised findings will establish confidence levels based on the JBI ConQual approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review does not require formal ethical review since it is based on available published literature. Findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, and, if possible, presented in scientific conferences.

Indexed as

Education, Nursing, BaccalaureateHigh Fidelity Simulation TrainingStudents, NursingChinaHumansPatient SimulationSystematic Reviews as Topiceducation & training (see medical education & training)protocols & guidelinesqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID33293391
PMCPMC7725085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.