ArticleBMJ simulation & technology enhanced learning2018
A qualitative evaluation of the role of simulation in policy development for service improvement.
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. 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.
- Peer Effects on Safety and Productivity in a Simulated Workplace Through Usability and Ecological Validity Testing of a Nonimmersive Virtual Simulation With University Students: Cross-Sectional Qualitative Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- 'Serious Games' for unboxing Global Digital Health policymaking.BMJ simulation & technology enhanced learning · 2020Article
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
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of simulation-based techniques to prospectively assess developing polices prior to implementation. Methods: A self-selected sample of nursing staff from a local, acute hospital reviewed a draft intravenous drug administration policy before simulating drug administration of either an infusion or direct injection. The participants completed a postsimulation questionnaire regarding the new policy and simulation, took part in a semistructured interview and were observed during the simulation with their consent. Results: 10 staff attended the simulation. The emergent themes identified a wide range of factors relating to the everyday usability and practicalities of the policy. There were issues surrounding inconsistent language between different clinical teams and training requirements for the new policy. Conclusion: Simulation, using simple scenarios, allows the safe evaluation of new policies before publication to ensure they are appropriate for front-line use. It engages staff in user-centred design in their own healthcare system.
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.