ArticleCureus2024
Mapping the Landscape: Simulation Centers in Portugal.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionSimulation-based training has emerged as a vital component of healthcare education. This study aims to characterize Portuguese simulation centers concerning their geographic distribution and key features, providing stakeholders with valuable insights to inform strategic decisions.
methodsA cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted over two years (2021-2023) to investigate the geographical dispersion and characteristics of simulation centers in Portugal. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to analyze data.
resultsTwenty-three Portuguese simulation centers were included. Major urban areas and coastal regions bring together 20 simulation centers (86.96%). A large percentage (71.93%) of centers were affiliated with academic institutions, while five centers (21.74%) were clinically affiliated. Emergency care, Anesthesiology and Intensive Medicine, Pediatrics, and Gynecology and Obstetrics were identified as the national key areas of intervention. DISCUSSION: Significant geographical disparity raises concerns about unequal access to professional training opportunities using simulation. Centers should be encouraged to incorporate developing technologies and innovative pedagogical methodologies and to expand their training repertoire into relatively uncharted territories.
conclusionSeveral issues have been identified within the national simulation network. Stakeholders and policymakers should prioritize equitable access, bolster the prevalence of clinical affiliated centers, foster innovation, and facilitate strategic coordination.
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.