ArticleCureus2025
Nursing Students' Views on the Timing of Simulation-Based Education: Before Versus During Clinical Placements.
Article in Cureus, 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
backgroundSimulation-based education is widely recognized for enhancing nursing students' clinical preparedness and confidence. However, limited research has explored how the timing of simulation, before vs. during clinical placements, affects perceived effectiveness. This study aimed to explore nursing students' perceptions of the effectiveness of simulation-based training delivered at two different time points: before and during clinical placements.
methodsA within-subject cross-sectional survey was conducted among 125 final-year undergraduate nursing students at a university in Saudi Arabia. The survey included quantitative items and an open-ended question to capture perceptions. Descriptive statistics, paired samples t-test, and qualitative content analysis were used. The study followed Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology cross-sectional reporting guidelines.
resultsAlthough 76 students (60.8%) preferred preclinical simulation, positioning it as a critical preparatory step in clinical readiness, there was no statistically significant difference in effectiveness ratings between the two timings (mean = 6.5, p = 0.80; Cohen's d = 0). Qualitative responses showed that students valued both timings for distinct purposes: preclinical simulation reduced anxiety and built foundational skills, while in-placement simulation reinforced learning and supported real-time application. A combined simulation approach was favored by 101 students (80.8%), supporting the value of longitudinal integration.
conclusionStudents perceive simulations as beneficial, regardless of timing, but recognize the unique value of each. Findings highlight the importance of strategically and flexibly embedding simulation across the curriculum. Nursing programs should adopt a developmentally sequenced simulation strategy that supports learners' progression and addresses both preparatory and reinforcing roles across the clinical education continuum.
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.