Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39261889›Full record

ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2024

TEAMs go VR-validating the TEAM in a virtual reality (VR) medical team training.

Rafael Wespi, Lukas Schwendimann, Andrea Neher, Tanja Birrenbach, Stefan K Schauber, Tanja Manser, Thomas C Sauter, Juliane E Kämmer

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 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

8 authors.

Rafael WespiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. rafael.wespi@bluewin.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3416-3938
Lukas SchwendimannDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Andrea NeherDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-4911-8806
Tanja BirrenbachDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3046-0900
Stefan K SchauberCentre for Educational Measurement (CEMO) & Unit for Health Sciences Education, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1832-2732
Tanja ManserFHNW School of Applied Psychology, University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Northwestern Switzerland, Olten, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5852-8735
Thomas C Sauter *Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6646-5789
Juliane E Kämmer *Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6042-8453

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInadequate collaboration in healthcare can lead to medical errors, highlighting the importance of interdisciplinary teamwork training. Virtual reality (VR) simulation-based training presents a promising, cost-effective approach. This study evaluates the effectiveness of the Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) for assessing healthcare student teams in VR environments to improve training methodologies.

methodsForty-two medical and nursing students participated in a VR-based neurological emergency scenario as part of an interprofessional team training program. Their performances were assessed using a modified TEAM tool by two trained coders. Reliability, internal consistency, and concurrent validity of the tool were evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha.

resultsRater agreement on TEAM's leadership, teamwork, and task management domains was high, with ICC values between 0.75 and 0.90. Leadership demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.90), while teamwork and task management showed moderate to acceptable consistency (alpha = 0.78 and 0.72, respectively). Overall, the TEAM tool exhibited high internal consistency (alpha = 0.89) and strong concurrent validity with significant correlations to global performance ratings.

conclusionThe TEAM tool proved to be a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating team dynamics in VR-based training scenarios. This study highlights VR's potential in enhancing medical education, especially in remote or distanced learning contexts. It demonstrates a dependable approach for team performance assessment, adding value to VR-based medical training. These findings pave the way for more effective, accessible interdisciplinary team assessments, contributing significantly to the advancement of medical education.

Indexed as

Interprofessional educationMedical educationMedicine studentNursing studentSimulationTeam trainingVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID39261889
PMCPMC11389291

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.