Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39039553›Full record

ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2024

Health simulation through the lens of self-determination theory - opportunities and pathways for discovery.

Ellen Davies

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

1 author.

Ellen DaviesAdelaide Health Simulation, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. Ellen.Davies@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4408-2461

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health simulation is broadly viewed as an appealing, impactful, and innovative enhancement for the education and assessment of health professions students and practitioners. We have seen exponential and global growth in programmes implementing simulation techniques and technologies. Alongside this enthusiasm and growth, the theoretical underpinnings that might guide the efficacy of the field have not always been considered. Many of the principles that guide simulation design, development and practice have been intuited through practical trial and error. In considering how to retrofit theory to practice, we have at our disposal existing theories that may assist with building our practice, expertise, identity as a community of practice, authority and legitimacy as a field. Self-determination theory (SDT) is an established and evolving theory that examines the quality of motivation and human behaviours. It has been applied to a variety of contexts and provides evidence that may support and enhance the practice of health simulation. In this paper, SDT is outlined, and avenues for examining the fit of theory to practice are suggested. Promising links exist between SDT and health simulation. Opportunities and new pathways of discovery await.

Indexed as

Health simulationSelf-determination theorySimulation-based educationTheory

Identifiers

PMID39039553
PMCPMC11265461

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.