Trial reportBMC medical education2025
Comparison of the observer role vs. active participant role in interprofessional simulation-based education for affective skills: a randomized-controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdequate bowel preparation is a critical aspect of colonoscopy, mainly pivoting on the education provided by the relevant healthcare professionals to the patient. Conventional methods of counselling education for these healthcare professionals have prioritized one-to-one practice of the skill over learning through observing fellow learners during simulation-based learning activities. The efficacy of observer roles in simulation for bowel preparation education remains underexplored. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of observer roles versus hands-on practice in simulation-based education.
methodsA simulation-based session was conducted for healthcare professionals involved in bowel preparation education to patients. Learners were randomly assigned to either an observer role in simulation group or a one-to-one practice group. Both groups received standardized education on bowel preparation techniques. Pre- and post-activity self-efficacy scores were collected using a 5-point likert scale. The scores were analyzed using appropriate statistical methods to compare the effectiveness of observer roles versus one-to-one practice.
resultsBoth groups demonstrated substantial improvements in self-efficacy scores post-activity. A median difference of + 0.8 was seen in the control group whereas + 1.1 in the observer group (p = 0.64), revealing comparable increase in confidence of observer and active participants in performing counselling of patients for bowel preparation. This similarity was refelcted in the post-test as well, in which both groups reached a score of 11 out of 13 (p = 0.7).
conclusionObserver roles in simulation are equally effective as hands-on practice for bowel preparation education for healthcare professionals. Both methods contribute significantly to enhancing participants’ self-efficacy in performing bowel preparation counselling. Incorporating observer roles in simulation-based education can offer a cost-effective, resource-efficient, and time-efficient solution for this education.
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.