Trial reportAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2024
Relinquishing control? Supervisor co-regulation may disrupt students' self-regulated learning during simulation-based training.
Trial report in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metacognitive regulation: emergence, focus, and function in interprofessional collaborative learning.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2026Article
- Exploring the role of self-led debriefings within simulation-based education: time to challenge the status quo?Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When uncertain, medical trainees often seek to co-regulate their learning with supervisors and peers. Evidence suggests they may enact self-regulated learning (SRL) strategies differently when engaged in self- versus co-regulated learning (Co-RL). We compared the impacts of SRL and Co-RL on trainees' acquisition, retention, and preparation for future learning (PFL) of cardiac auscultation skills during simulation-based training. In our two-arm, prospective, non-inferiority trial, we randomly assigned first- and second-year medical students to the SRL (N = 16) or Co-RL conditions (N = 16). Across two learning sessions separated by two-weeks, participants practiced and were assessed in diagnosing simulated cardiac murmurs. We examined diagnostic accuracy and learning trace data across sessions, and conducted semi-structured interviews to explore participants' understandings of their underlying choices and learning strategies. SRL participants' outcomes were non-inferior to Co-RL participants on the immediate post-test and retention test, but not on the PFL assessment (i.e., inconclusive). Analyzing interview transcripts (N = 31) generated three themes: perceived utility of initial learning supports for future learning; SRL strategies and sequencing of murmurs; and perceived control over learning across sessions. Co-RL participants regularly described relinquishing control of learning to supervisors and regaining it when on their own. For some trainees, Co-RL seemed to interfere with their situated and future SRL. We posit that transient clinical training sessions, typical in simulation-based and workplace-based settings, may not allow the ideal processes of Co-RL to unfold between supervisor and trainee. Future research must examine how supervisors and trainees can share accountability to develop the shared mental models that underlie effective Co-RL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37245197What 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.