ArticleBMJ open2024
Virtual clinical simulation as a paedagogical strategy in healthcare learning: Evidence and Gap Map protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVirtual clinical simulation involves creating and applying scenarios using technology like computers or virtual reality. This method provides a secure experiential learning environment, encouraging active student participation and stimulating clinical, critical and reflective thinking. This article outlines the development of the Evidence and Gap Map, which aims to identify, quantify and visually and interactively classify existing systematic reviews on the effectiveness of virtual clinical simulations in health professional training. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Evidence and Gap Map will adhere to the Campbell Collaboration Guidelines. Bibliographic searches in six databases will follow inclusion criteria determined by the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome and Study design strategy. After the initial calibration, two reviewers will independently apply the inclusion and exclusion criteria to the title and abstract of each identified study, with subsequent full reading of the selected articles. The methodological quality of the included systematic reviews will be assessed with the AMSTAR 2 tool. The map will be developed using the EPPI-Mapper software. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: There is no requirement for ethical approval for this systematic review. On completion, it will be published in a peer-reviewed academic journal and presented at a conference. This review protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework platform (OSF Associated Project Registration: osf.io/r6wdc and received the following DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/R6WDC).
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.