Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40675641›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Exploring the use of low-cost simulation in nursing education: a scoping review.

Duccio Frangi, Yari Bardacci, Camilla Elena Magi, Khadija El Aoufy, Yari Longobucco, Paolo Iovino, Carla Amato, Chiara Balestri, Carolina Forciniti, Laura Rasero and 3 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

13 authors.

Duccio FrangiIntensive Rehabilitation Unit, IRCCS Don Carlo Gnocchi Foundation, Florence, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-3840-7064
Yari BardacciDepartment of Emergency, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Camilla Elena MagiDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy camillaelena.magi@unifi.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-5599-2405
Khadija El AoufyDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3278-8296
Yari LongobuccoDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2703-9349
Paolo IovinoDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5952-881X
Carla AmatoDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-9076-162X
Chiara BalestriDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Carolina ForcinitiMedical and Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Laura RaseroDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Pasquale IozzoDepartment of Emergency, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Policlinico Paolo Giaccone, Palermo, Italy.
Alberto LucchiniDepartment of Emergency - General ICU, ASST di Monza, Monza, Italy.
Stefano BambiDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis scoping review aims to assess low-cost simulation methods used in nursing education, evaluating how they balance educational effectiveness with budget constraints.

designScoping review conducted in accordance with Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase and CINAHL were systematically searched for relevant studies published between January 2000 and October 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included peer-reviewed primary studies involving nurses or nursing students, focused on the use of low-cost simulation in any healthcare setting. Studies had to describe the simulation strategy and its educational application. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts and extracted data using a standardised form. Findings were synthesised narratively and categorised by type of simulation, educational context and competencies addressed.

resultsOut of 3332 records, 39 studies met the inclusion criteria. The reviewed studies covered various clinical areas, including critical care, emergency, neonatal, paediatric and obstetric nursing, as well as transversal competencies such as communication and clinical reasoning. Low-cost methods included task trainers, mannequins, computer-based tools, hybrid models and serious games. Only 38% of studies reported detailed cost information.

conclusionsLow-cost simulation offers promising opportunities in nursing education but suffers from inconsistent cost reporting and a lack of standardisation. Further research is needed to evaluate its long-term effectiveness and support broader implementation.

Indexed as

Education, NursingSimulation TrainingClinical CompetenceHumansEDUCATION & TRAINING (see Medical Education & Training)Health Care CostsNurses

Identifiers

PMID40675641
PMCPMC12273113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.