Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35473614›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2022

Learning effects of virtual versus high-fidelity simulations in nursing students: a crossover comparison.

SoMi Park, Hea Kung Hur, ChaeWeon Chung

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07175467 (Development and Implementation of a Multi-Skill, Haptic-Supported Virtual Reality Simulation for Nursing Students), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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.

NCT07175467 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Development and Implementation of a Multi-Skill, Haptic-Supported Virtual Reality Simulation for Nursing Students

TypeinterventionalSponsorSakarya UniversityRan2025 to 2025Enrolled100ConditionsNursing, Skill Performance, Virtual Reality, Simulation-based TrainingArmsHaptic-asissted virtual simulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

3 authors.

SoMi ParkDepartment of Nursing, Wonju College of Medicine, Yonsei University, 20 Ilsan-ro, Wonju, Gangwon-do, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2568-7887
Hea Kung HurDepartment of Nursing, Wonju College of Medicine, Yonsei University, 20 Ilsan-ro, Wonju, Gangwon-do, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6266-1646
ChaeWeon ChungCollege of Nursing, Research Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, 103 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Korea. chungcw@snu.ac.kr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4781-6512

Funding

National Research Foundation of Korea 2021R1A2C1003083
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSimulation is an alternative or complementary method for students who cannot obtain sufficient direct care experience, as they allow students to experience various clinical situations. Mixed learning is becoming increasingly common as a way to provide students with opportunities to experience real-life clinical scenarios. This study compared the learning effects of a virtual simulation and a high-fidelity simulation in a different order of presentation, with a focus on training for premature rupture of membranes in the field maternity nursing. Through this comparison, this study aimed to obtain evidence to support decision-making regarding the most effective way to utilize mixed simulation strategies.

methodsA quasi-experimental, crossover-design study was performed with two randomly allocated groups of 26 junior nursing students each. The virtual simulation used the vSim® for nursing, and the high-fidelity simulation used a scenario developed by the research team. The learning effects were measured in terms of the problem-solving process, clinical reasoning, reflective thinking, satisfaction with the practicum, and self-confidence. The data collected with a structured questionnaire were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney test.

resultsThe virtual simulation-first, high-fidelity simulation-second order led to significantly higher scores for reflective thinking (z = 3.53, p < .001) and self-confidence (z = 2.47, p = .013) than the other order.

conclusionsThe initial application of virtual simulation seemed to improve students' thought processes, and then high-fidelity simulation seemed to allow them to perform actual practice better. Further trials of mixed learning methods are necessary to maximize learning effects in nursing education.

trial registrationKCT0005767  at 2021-01-12 registered.

Indexed as

Computer simulationHigh-fidelity simulationLearningMaternityNursing

Identifiers

PMID35473614
PMCPMC9042657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.