ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Comparison of simulation software and contrastive training on ECG interpretation competence in newly graduated nurses.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Improving the ability of nurses to interpret ECG and diagnose pathological disorders can be effective in preventing the complications of arrhythmias. Therefore, two of the most important indicators of nursing performance among newly graduated nurses for making clinical decisions are clinical competence and critical thinking. Therefore, this study was conducted to compare the effect of contrastive training and simulation software on the level of critical thinking and clinical competence in newly graduated nurses. Purpose: This quasi-experimental study was conducted in Shahrekord (Iran) to compare the effect of contrastive training and simulation software on the level of critical thinking and clinical competence in newly graduated nurses. Methods: A total of 66 newly graduated nurses participated in the study in two intervention and control groups. Inclusion criteria included providing informed consent to participate in the study, holding a bachelor's degree in nursing, and having work experience of fewer than 24 months. The fundamentals of electrocardiogram were taught through one session, and then in the contrastive training group, in 5 sessions of 35 min, and in the software group. Data were collected before, immediately after, and 3 months after the intervention with the Clinical Competency and Critical Thinking Questionnaire in electrocardiogram interpretation. Results: The mean pre-intervention score of clinical competence was 6.36 ± 1.98 in the software group and 6.36 ± 2.50 in the contrastive training group, and immediately after the intervention 9.06 ± 1.48 in the software group and 9.74 ± 1.53 in the contrastive training group. Three months after the intervention, the mean score was 8.27 ± 1.89 in the software group and 8.87 ± 1.78 in the contrastive training group. There was a significant difference among all steps ( Conclusion: Both contrastive training and simulation software promote critical thinking and clinical competence in interpreting electrocardiograms among newly graduated nurses, but the effects of training are mitigated over time and it is, therefore, necessary to take into consideration a longer training program using a simulation approach and contrastive training, especially in case of contrastive training.
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.