Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40809074›Full record

ArticleNeurology. Education2022

Curriculum Innovations: How Real Is Real Enough?: A Pilot Study Comparing Standardized Patients vs Manikin Simulators in a Neurologic Emergencies Training Course.

Catherine S W Albin, Emil Petrusa, James A Gordon, Deepa Malaiyandi, Sahar F Zafar

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology. Education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Catherine S W AlbinFrom the Department of Neurology (C.A.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; Departments of Surgery (E.P.), and Emergency Medicine (J.A.G.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston; MGH Learning Laboratory (E.P, J.A.G), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Department of Neurology (D.M.), University of Toledo, OH; and Department of Neurology (S.F.Z.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Emil PetrusaFrom the Department of Neurology (C.A.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; Departments of Surgery (E.P.), and Emergency Medicine (J.A.G.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston; MGH Learning Laboratory (E.P, J.A.G), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Department of Neurology (D.M.), University of Toledo, OH; and Department of Neurology (S.F.Z.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston.
James A GordonFrom the Department of Neurology (C.A.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; Departments of Surgery (E.P.), and Emergency Medicine (J.A.G.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston; MGH Learning Laboratory (E.P, J.A.G), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Department of Neurology (D.M.), University of Toledo, OH; and Department of Neurology (S.F.Z.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Deepa MalaiyandiFrom the Department of Neurology (C.A.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; Departments of Surgery (E.P.), and Emergency Medicine (J.A.G.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston; MGH Learning Laboratory (E.P, J.A.G), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Department of Neurology (D.M.), University of Toledo, OH; and Department of Neurology (S.F.Z.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Sahar F ZafarFrom the Department of Neurology (C.A.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; Departments of Surgery (E.P.), and Emergency Medicine (J.A.G.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston; MGH Learning Laboratory (E.P, J.A.G), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Department of Neurology (D.M.), University of Toledo, OH; and Department of Neurology (S.F.Z.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Simulation training has been increasingly adopted in neurology as an engaging way to promote active learning in a safe environment while offering a reproducible platform for real-time feedback. However, despite the increase in simulation programs, there remains uncertainty about which type of high-fidelity platform would best promote trainee knowledge and confidence acquisition. The objective of this study is to investigate whether increases in resident knowledge and confidence differ when a simulation course for acute neurology emergencies uses a standardized patient vs a manikin-video format. We also investigated trainees' management deviations from the treatment guidelines. Methods: Over 5 sessions, 20 junior neurology residents participated in a simulation training course in which they managed 3 neurologic emergencies: right middle cerebral artery stroke, status epilepticus, and pontine hemorrhage causing coma. Residents in the standardized patient group interacted with a live actor for the cases in which the patient was conscious. Residents in the manikin-video group interacted with a manikin for all 3 cases. Before and after the course, residents completed a 40-question multiple-choice test and a survey about their self-perceived confidence in handling 15 neurologic emergencies. To create an element of internal validity, 9 items were represented in the course curriculum and 6 were not. During the simulation, a detailed behavior checklist was used to assess decision-making and guideline adherence. All residents answered items about the educational quality of the simulation sessions. Results: Residents had significantly higher scores on the knowledge assessment after the training session (pre: 49% vs post: 72%, Discussion: This pilot study suggests that trainees' knowledge and confidence in the management of neurologic emergencies increase after simulated encounters, regardless of whether a live actor or manikin simulation platforms is used. The use of a behavior checklist uncovered important variations in guideline adherence among novice physicians.

Identifiers

PMID40809074
PMCPMC12339238

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.