ArticleHealth science reports2023
Interprofessional simulation as an enhancement of psychological fidelity: A focus group study of medical and nursing students.
Article in Health science reports, 2023. 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.
- Thai nursing students' experiences of stress, role positioning, and facilitation tone in simulation-based learning: implications for culturally responsive facilitation and debriefing.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026Article
- High-fidelity simulation in healthcare education: Design and delivery considerations for optimising teaching and learning in higher education.British paramedic journal · 2025Article
- Effect of AvTrachTracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2025Article
- "Reality shock"-a qualitative exploration of helicopter emergency medical services nurses' challenges and experiences in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Interprofessional simulation as an enhancement of psychological fidelity: A focus group study of medical and nursing students.Health science reports · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Interprofessional simulation has the potential to enhance the perceived realism of clinical simulation in the education of different healthcare professionals. This study considers how the inclusion of more than one profession in clinical simulation contributes to this psychological fidelity, defined as the subjective perception of the realism of a simulation, and the cues identified by medical and nursing students. Methods: Eight focus groups were carried out with 27 medical and 18 nursing students in Newcastle and Oxford, UK. These were carried out immediately after students' participation in simulation sessions consisting of three acute scenarios. Focus group discussions encompassed perceptions of the realism of the simulation and of participants' own and other professional groups. Thematic analysis was carried out on transcripts. Results: The analysis identified features of psychological fidelity that were influenced by the interprofessional element of the simulation. These included overall impressions of realism, and the perceived roles and expectations of doctors and nurses within the simulation. In particular, the presence of the other professional group afforded a more authentic response. Other features varied with the viewpoint of the student groups, in particular the realism of the patient manikin, which held lower psychological fidelity for the nursing students, because it did not allow them to fulfill their perceived role of delivering holistic, relational care. Conclusion: Recognizing "psychological fidelity" as a subjective response to simulation allows greater consideration of the limitations of fidelity as a designed or engineered property of a simulation. While interprofessional involvement directly enhances psychological fidelity in some ways, potential differences in the views of students from different professional groups should be considered when implementing interprofessional simulation.
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.