Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33472706›Full record

ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2021

Simulation-based team training in time-critical clinical presentations in emergency medicine and critical care: a review of the literature.

Jesper Weile, Mette Amalie Nebsbjerg, Stig Holm Ovesen, Charlotte Paltved, Mads Lind Ingeman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Critical illness in prisons: a multi-methods analysis of reported healthcare safety incidents in England.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Simulation-based medical education in Canadian anesthesiology academic institutions: a national survey.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Sepsis and Clinical Simulation: What Is New? (and Old).Journal of personalized medicine · 2023
    Review
  19. Simulation: past, present, and future.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2023
    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

5 authors.

Jesper WeileEmergency Department, Regional Hospital Horsens, Horsens, Denmark. jesper.weile@clin.au.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6664-3573
Mette Amalie NebsbjergResearch Center for Emergency Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Blvd. 161, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.
Stig Holm OvesenResearch Center for Emergency Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Blvd. 161, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.
Charlotte PaltvedCorporate HR MidtSim, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark.
Mads Lind IngemanDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of simulation-based team training has increased over the past decades. Simulation-based team training within emergency medicine and critical care contexts is best known for its use by trauma teams and teams involved in cardiac arrest. In the domain of emergency medicine, simulation-based team training is also used for other typical time-critical clinical presentations. We aimed to review the existing literature and current state of evidence pertaining to non-technical skills obtained via simulation-based team training in emergency medicine and critical care contexts, excluding trauma and cardiac arrest contexts.

methodsThis systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Before the initiation of the study, the protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database. We conducted a systematic literature search of 10 years of publications, up to December 17, 2019, in the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. Two authors independently reviewed all the studies and extracted data.

resultsOf the 456 studies screened, 29 trials were subjected to full-text review, and 13 studies were included in the final review. None of the studies was randomized controlled trials, and no studies compared simulation training to different modalities of training. Studies were heterogeneous; they applied simulation-training concepts of different durations and intensities and used different outcome measures for non-technical skills. Two studies reached Kirkpatrick level 3. Out of the remaining 11 studies, nine reached Kirkpatrick level 2, and two reached Kirkpatrick level 1.

conclusionsThe literature on simulation-based team training in emergency medicine is heterogeneous and sparse, but somewhat supports the hypothesis that simulation-based team training is beneficial to teams' knowledge and attitudes toward non-technical skills (Kirkpatrick level 2). Randomized trials are called for to clarify the effect of simulation compared to other modalities of team training. Future research should focus on the transfer of skills and investigate improvements in patient outcomes (Kirkpatrick level 4).

Indexed as

Critical careEmergency medicineSimulation-based team training

Identifiers

PMID33472706
PMCPMC7816464

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.