ArticleBMC medical education2025
Evaluation of healthcare simulation centers: development of the "STRIVE" tool using the Delphi method.
Article 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSimulation-based medical education (SBME) is a critical tool for teaching and assessing technical and non-technical medical skills. Healthcare simulation centers (HSCs) are multidisciplinary centers that are proliferating in number and provide simulation-based medical education to various groups of trainees, including medical students, residents, healthcare professionals, and nurses. Large investments in the physical space, simulation hardware, and expert human resources are required to set up HSCs. However, most published research on simulation training has focused on the content and evaluation of the training. The evaluation of HSCs has rarely been discussed. This study aimed to identify the most appropriate aspects for the evaluation of HSCs using the Delphi technique and to develop an evaluation model in China.
methodsThirty simulation centers were identified as potential participants. The first round of the Delphi process was a brainstorming exercise. The initial questionnaire contained one main question: What aspects do you think should be included in the evaluation of HSCs? The steering group reviewed the responses received from participants in the first round of the Delphi, removed duplicates, and organized the items into different categories. Responses from the second round of the Delphi method were analyzed and presented as frequencies and percentages. The consensus level was set at 70%. If this goal was not achieved, the participants were asked to participate in a third round of the Delphi exercise.
resultsTwenty-four experts (the heads of HSCs) completed the first round of Delphi. The response rate was 80%. In the first round, 106 items were suggested. After verifying the content and removing duplicates, 45 items were left. The model for the evaluation of the HSCs was named “STRIVE,” reflecting a combination of the initial of each of the six involved categories: simulation curricula, training of faculty, result of training, internal resources, variety of activities, effect of activities. The response rate was 100% in the second round. The STRIVE model identified the 24 most frequently mentioned items across six categories.
conclusionThe STRIVE model can help HSCs managers understand and evaluate their centers more comprehensively. It can also help them address their shortcomings.
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.