Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37127593›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

Evaluation of the simulation based training quality assurance tool (SBT-QA10) as a measure of learners' perceptions during the action phase of simulation.

Kim Ekelund, Stephanie O'Regan, Peter Dieckmann, Doris Østergaard, Leonie Watterson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Learning from medical errors.CVIR endovascular · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kim EkelundCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation, Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark. kim.ekelund@regionh.dk.
Stephanie O'ReganSydney Clinical Skills and Simulation Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.
Peter DieckmannCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation, Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark.
Doris ØstergaardCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation, Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark.
Leonie WattersonSydney Clinical Skills and Simulation Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn an earlier interview-based study the authors identified that learners experience one or more of eight explicit perceptual responses during the active phase of simulation-based training (SBT) comprising a sense: of belonging to instructor and group, of being under surveillance, of having autonomy and responsibility for patient management, of realism, of an understanding of the scenario in context, of conscious mental effort, of control of attention, and of engagement with task. These were adapted into a ten-item questionnaire: the Simulation Based Training Quality Assurance Tool (SBT-QA10) to allow monitoring of modifiable factors that may impact upon learners' experiences. This study assessed the construct validity evidence of the interpretation of the results when using SBT-QAT10. MATERIALS AND

methodsRecently graduated doctors and nurses participating in a SBT course on the topic of the deteriorating patient completed the SBT-QAT10 immediately following their participation in the scenarios. The primary outcome measure was internal consistency of the questionnaire items and their correlation to learners' satisfaction scores. A secondary outcome measure compared the impact of allocation to active versus observer role.

resultsA total of 349 questionnaires were returned by 96 course learners. The median of the total score for the ten perception items (TPS) was 39 (out of 50), with no significant difference between the scenarios. We identified fair and positive correlations between nine of the 10 items and the SBT-QA10-TPS, the exception being "mental effort". Compared to observers, active learners reported significantly more positive perceptions related to belonging to the team and interaction with the instructor, their sense of acting independently, and being focused. The questionnaire items were poorly correlated with the two measures of global satisfaction.

conclusionExcept for the item for mental effort, the QA10-TPS measures learners' experiences during the active phase of simulation scenarios that are associated with a positive learning experience. The tool may have utility to learners, instructors, and course providers by informing subsequent debriefing and reflection upon practice for learners and faculty. The relationship between these perceptions and commonly used measures of satisfaction remains poorly understood raising questions about the value of the latter.

Indexed as

Simulation TrainingClinical CompetenceComputer SimulationHumansLearningSurveys and QuestionnairesConstruct validityLearners’ perceptionObserver roleQuality Assurance ToolQuestionnaire developmentSimulation-based learningSimulation-based training

Identifiers

PMID37127593
PMCPMC10152736

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.