ArticleBMJ simulation & technology enhanced learning2018
IMPLSE course: a near-peer simulation course.
Article in BMJ simulation & technology enhanced learning, 2018. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Near-peer teaching is recognised for its benefit to both students and facilitators when used as an adjunct to traditional teaching. Simulation is an effective tool for teaching acute management. There are currently no published long-term objective data of the efficacy of near-peer simulation teaching. Methods: We designed the 'Immediate Management: Peer Led Simulated Emergencies' course, a near-peer simulation course for medical students run by junior doctors covering common medical and surgical emergencies. Participants and teachers were objectively tested before and after sessions, and participant confidence in various areas was self-assessed. Participants were followed up at 18 months with both repeat testing and analysis of finals examination results. Results: Participants' mean test scores improved significantly postcourse and remained significantly higher than baseline at 18-month follow-up. There was no difference between participants' and non-participants' final examination performance. Participant confidence increased in all areas immediately and at 18-month follow-up. Junior doctor facilitator test scores significantly improved after teaching on the course. Conclusions: Near-peer simulation courses can be effectively designed and run by junior doctors and our results suggest that they result in long-term improvement in test scores. Larger studies with randomised control groups are required to confirm the efficacy of such teaching.
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.