ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2025
Physiological team dynamics explored: physiological synchrony in medical simulation training.
Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionFor researchers and medical simulation trainers, measuring team dynamics is vital for providing targeted feedback that can lead to improved patient outcomes. It is also valuable for research, such as investigating which dynamics benefit team performance. Traditional assessment methods, such as questionnaires and observations, are often subjective and static, lacking the ability to capture team dynamics. To address these shortcomings, this study explores the use of physiological synchrony (PS) measured through electrocardiogram (ECG) data to evaluate team dynamics automated and in high-resolution.
methodsA multicentre observational field study was conducted involving 214 medical first responders during mixed reality (MR) mass casualty training sessions. Participants were equipped with electrocardiogram (ECG) sensors and MR gear. The study measured dyadic PS using heart rate (HR), root mean square of successive differences (RMSSD), and standard deviation of NN intervals (SDNN). Data were collected at high frequency and analysed using dynamic time warping (dtw) to assess fluctuations in PS.
resultsFindings indicate that PS varies significantly by task nature, with higher synchrony during cooperative tasks compared to baseline. Different ECG metrics offered unique insights into team dynamics. Proximity and scenario conditions influenced PS, with closer teamwork leading to higher PS. Smaller sampling intervals (e.g. 5 s) provided a detailed view of PS fluctuations over time. DISCUSSION: The results demonstrate the potential of PS as an indicator of team performance and cohesion. High-resolution monitoring provides detailed insights into team dynamics, offering high-resolution feedback that traditional methods cannot provide. The integration of physiological measures into training programmes can enhance team performance by providing objective, high-resolution data.
conclusionThis study shows that PS, measured by ECG data, is sensitive to medical team activities, offering insights into team dynamics. Different ECG metrics highlight various aspects of team performance, and high-resolution monitoring captures detailed dynamics. Further research is needed to validate these findings across diverse scenarios. This approach could improve training methodologies, resulting in better-prepared medical teams and improved patient care outcomes.
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.