ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Educational Effects of Simulation and Non-Simulation Training in Airway Management according to Levels of the Kirkpatrick Model: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Closed reduction of acute posterior shoulder dislocation via intra-articular anesthesia: a case report and technical note.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Article
- Simulation-based education in paramedic training: effects of perceived competence and practice frequency on clinical skills.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of rehabilitation nursing training for clinical nurses based on the Kirkpatrick model.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Training and assessment of skills in flexible optical intubation - Protocol of a scoping review.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025Review
- Simulation in airway management teaching and training.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is insufficient validation of the effectiveness of simulation-based training (Sim) or non-simulation-based training (non-Sim) for teaching airway management to healthcare professionals within the literature. We thus conducted a network meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of Sim, non-Sim, and no educational intervention (NI) for airway management. The primary endpoints were knowledge scores (KnS) and behavioral performance scores (BpS) corresponding to assessments at levels 2 and 3 of the Kirkpatrick model, respectively. Effect sizes were expressed as standardized mean differences (Std. MD) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Regarding KnS, the educational effects of Sim and non-Sim were significantly improved compared to those of NI (Std. MD [95% CI]: 1.110 [0.903-1.316] and 0.819 [0.209-1.429], respectively); there was no significant difference between Sim and non-Sim. The educational effect of Sim in BpS was significantly improved compared to that of non-Sim and NI (0.850 [0.015-1.691] and 0.660 [0.241-1.076]); there were no differences between non-Sim and NI. Surface under the cumulative rank curve values demonstrated that Sim ranked highest in efficacy for KnS and BpS. This study provides valuable information regarding the educational efficacy of Sim and non-Sim in airway management. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.
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.