ArticleCureus2025
Introducing Low-Fidelity Simulation Teaching in the Early Years of Undergraduate Medical Training.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Progress in educational theory and translational implementation of simulation-based education for healthcare professionals: an integrative analysis from theory to effectiveness.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- 10 tips for clinical educators in designing and delivering learning experiences to improve clinical reasoning for medical students.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSimulation is a widely used educational tool for both undergraduate and postgraduate medical education. There are different levels of simulation fidelity; low fidelity uses simplistic models but is often cost/time effective, whereas high fidelity tends to bring more realism but is resource-intensive. In undergraduate medical training, simulation is often used for students in their final year of medical school prior to qualifying as a doctor, and therefore, the literature is limited with regard to students in their earlier years of training. The aim of this project was to create cost/resource-effective, low-fidelity simulation training sessions for more junior medical students to help them consolidate skills learnt in isolation, in turn facilitating higher levels of critical thinking.
methodsWe developed low-fidelity simulation sessions for third-year (first year clinical) medical students. These comprised clinical scenarios that would encourage students to apply skills that were previously taught or assessed in isolation, to form a holistic clinical assessment of a patient. Students were given a pre- and post-session questionnaire to help ascertain the usefulness of the sessions.
resultsThirty-two students took part in the simulation sessions. Questionnaires were used to ascertain their level of confidence in the full assessment of a patient. Their pre- and post-session feedback was compared, and the subjective scores were 4.09/10 and 8.25/10, respectively (p<0.05). Qualitative feedback suggested that the students enjoyed the clinically adjacent nature of the scenarios and felt that they were able to consolidate the knowledge they had obtained in pre-clinical years. DISCUSSION/
conclusionsWe demonstrated that students in earlier years of training can benefit from simulation teaching. Running the sessions was light on resources and an effective tool for students to consolidate skills and apply higher levels of thinking, preparing them for future years of 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.