ArticleClinical simulation in nursing2022
Comparing the Learning Effectiveness of Three Virtual Simulation Tools With Nursing Students During the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic.
Article in Clinical simulation in nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We explored the learning effectiveness of three virtual simulation tools used in the Coronavirus Disease pandemic environment. Sample: Study participants consisted of students from two nursing classes, a junior and a senior class. Method: A mixed-methods approach compared three tools' performance across five learning domains. Descriptive statistics and analysis of variance compared mean ratings for learning domains. Open-ended questions were included for qualitative evaluation. Results: Thirty-six respondents rated the Resource Simulation Center (RSC), based on the observation of videos of students undergoing simulation exercises, as superior to the other two. There were no differences between the other two tools. Qualitative findings echoed preference by students for "RSC". Conclusion: "RSC" was preferred over a commercial product based on computer generated graphics, and a free-online product based on clinical scenarios acted out in short videos. Differences in debriefing practices may have influenced the results, thereby emphasizing the role of debriefing with virtual simulation tools.
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.