ArticleClinical simulation in nursing2021
Use of Virtually Facilitated Simulation to Improve COVID-19 Preparedness in Rural and Remote Canada.
Article in Clinical simulation in nursing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Simulation-Based Education for Health Professionals in Rural and Remote Contexts in High-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.The Australian journal of rural health · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence literacy and related factors among nursing undergraduates in Northeast China.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Canadian healthcare workforce: a rapid evidence synthesis of key considerations, lessons learned, and promising practices to address the healthcare workforce crisis.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Low Resource, High Impact: Just-In-Time Training Toolkit in Response to a Public Health Crisis.Clinical simulation in nursing · 2024Article
- Article
- Disaster nursing competencies of rural nurses during COVID-19: A cross-sectional study.Collegian (Royal College of Nursing, Australia) · 2023Article
- Distributed team processes in healthcare services: a scoping review.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- COVID-19 preparedness and response in rural and remote areas: A scoping review.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- SimUniversity at a distance: a descriptive account of a team-based remote simulation competition for health professions students.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Alberta Health Services' Provincial Simulation Program (eSIM) is Canada's largest simulation program. The eSIM mobile simulation program specializes in delivering simulation-based education (SBE) to rural and remote communities (RRC). During the COVID-19 pandemic, a quality improvement project involving rapid cycle Methods: Between April 24 and July 31, 2020, a team of six rural simulationists (four nurses and two physicians) provided 24 VFS sessions with virtual debriefing to 200 health care providers distributed across 11 RRC in Alberta and the Northwest Territories, covering a geographic area of approximately 169,028 km Results: Video analysis of sequential VFS rapid cycle sessions using a standardized observational tool indicated decreased personal protective equipment (PPE) breaches by 36.6% between the first and third cycles. Teams demonstrated increased competency with airway management such as correct use of bag-valve-mask ventilation, and implementation of health system process improvements, such as incorporation of an intubation checklist. Improvements occurred on average over 2.2 rapid cycles completed within 1.3 weeks per RRC. Postsession self-reported participant electronic surveys indicated self-reported improvement in clinical management, teamwork behavior, and health systems issues outcome measures which were categorized based on the Crisis Resource Management and Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) frameworks. Of the 48 survey respondents, 86.1% reported that VFS was equivalent or superior to in-person simulation. The cost of VFS was 62.9% lower than comparable in-person SBE. Conclusion: VFS provides a rapidly mobilizable and cost-effective way of delivering high-quality SBE to geographically isolated communities.
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.