Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Impact of Non-Face-to-Face Teaching with Passive Training on Personal Protective Equipment Use in Health Science Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to Enhance COVID-19 Pandemic Health Literacy in Health Professionals: Systematic Review.JMIR medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Facilitated interactive video versus simulation-based training after a standardized lecture for basic life support in medical students: a randomized trial.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Training in Teaching Personal Protective Equipment Skills: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Technological mediation and humanization of nursing care: a systematic literature review.Revista CuidarteArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the COVID-19 era, there was a call for the transformation of higher education. Universities had to combine non-face-to-face teaching with traditional procedures. This study analyzed the effectiveness and perceived satisfaction in a cohort of health sciences students of non-face-to-face teaching with passive training versus face-to-face teaching with active training in the proper donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE) in a clinical simulation scenario.
methodsA total of 142 participants were randomized into two groups: (a) non-face-to-face teaching with passive training; (b) face-to-face teaching with active training. The proper protocol for donning and doffing PPE was assessed. Students evaluated their skills before and after training and satisfaction with training received.
resultsSignificant differences were observed for the statements "I felt more confident in donning after receiving this training" (
conclusionsFace-to-face teaching with active training improves effectiveness and satisfaction more than non-face-to-face teaching with passive training for acquiring skills in donning and doffing PPE properly.
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.