ReviewAcute medicine & surgery
Use of high-fidelity simulation technology in disasters: an integrative literature review.
Review in Acute medicine & surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reframing disaster simulation as a translational systems intervention: a design-based comparative analysis of MRMI and the Emergo Train System (ETS).BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Reflective learning experiences of nursing students in a COVID-19 disaster simulation: a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Learning components for mixed reality mass casualty incident training: a modified Delphi study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Extended reality training for mass casualty incidents: a systematic review on effectiveness and experience of medical first responders.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Review
- Mixed Reality Platforms in Telehealth Delivery: Scoping Review.JMIR biomedical engineering · 2023Article
- Extended reality as a training method for medical first responders in mass casualty incidents: A protocol for a systematic review.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
New innovative high-fidelity simulation (HFS) technologies, including augmented reality and virtual reality, have begun being used for disaster response and preparedness. However, few studies have assessed the merit of these technologies in disaster simulation. This integrative literature review of 21 studies assesses the role of HFS technology in disaster. Most studies used a quantitative methodology (71.4%), followed by mixed (19%) or qualitative methods (9.6%). Nearly 60% covered only disaster preparedness phase, whereas 10% addressed disasters in middle-income countries without including low-income nations. The four most frequently mentioned technologies were immersive virtual reality simulation, computerized virtual reality simulation, full-scale simulation, and augmented reality wearable smart glasses simulation. Nearly 50% of the studies used technology for purposes other than disaster simulation education, including telemedicine (14.3%), risk planning (14.3%), high-risk map generation for preparedness purposes (9.5%), or rehabilitation medicine (4.8%). HFS technologies must be further evaluated outside of high-income countries and in different disaster phases to better understand their full potential in disaster simulation. Future research should consider different health professions and more robust protocols to assist disaster response professionals and agencies in the adoption of HFS technologies.
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.