ArticleDiving and hyperbaric medicine2022
A Delphi study to identify relevant scenarios as the first step toward an international hyperbaric medicine simulation curriculum.
Article in Diving and hyperbaric medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A web-based training simulator of clinical hyperbaric chamber.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Cardiopulmonary resuscitation during hyperbaric oxygen therapy: a comprehensive review and recommendations for practice.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEvidence across healthcare specialties suggests that simulation-based education improves practices and patient outcomes. However, simulation has yet to be widely used in hyperbaric medicine education. We aimed to identify the most relevant clinical scenarios for inclusion in a simulation-based curriculum for hyperbaric medicine.
methodsAfter ethics approval, we used a modified Delphi consensus method. We assembled an initial questionnaire and distributed it online in English and French to an international group of hyperbaric physicians and operators using a snowball recruitment technique. Participants rated the list of scenarios using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (least relevant) to 5 (most relevant). Scenarios judged by at least 80% of participants to be relevant (score 4 or 5) were automatically included. Scenarios that did not meet this threshold and new scenarios suggested by participants during the first round were included in a second round.
resultsSeventy-one participants from nine countries, including both physicians and non-physicians, completed the first round and 34 completed the second. Five scenarios were identified as relevant: seizure, fire, cardiac arrest, pneumothorax, and technical deficiency such as power loss while operating the chamber.
conclusionsFive scenarios relevant for inclusion in the simulation-based curriculum in hyperbaric medicine were identified by expert consensus.
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.