ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2026
Feasibility, usability, and preliminary knowledge outcomes of a virtual-reality fire-safety training for undergraduate nursing students: a quasi-experimental study.
Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn‑hospital fires are rare but high‑risk events, and nurses must be able to recognize hazards and initiate first‑response actions. This study compared a virtual‑reality (VR) fire‑safety training group with a time‑matched lecture group (covering the same learning objectives) and assessed system usability in the VR group among nursing students.
methodsWe conducted a quasi-experimental study among undergraduate nursing students at RAK Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al Khaimah (RAK), United Arab Emirates. Two pre-existing timetable-based student groups, created by the university registrar during routine scheduling, were assigned as clusters to either the VR training group or a time-matched lecture group covering the same learning objectives. A researcher-developed 12-item fire-safety knowledge test (total score 0-12; 1 point per item) was administered before and after the session. Usability of the VR system was measured with the 10-item System Usability Scale (SUS; 0-100). Analyses included paired t-tests, chi-square tests, and analysis of covariance controlling for baseline knowledge (alpha = 0.05).
resultsN = 130 students (VR group, n = 65; lecture group, n = 65) completed the study. Knowledge improved from 5.8 ± 1.2 to 9.3 ± 1.0 in the VR group (p < 0.001) and from 5.7 ± 1.3 to 7.8 ± 1.5 in the lecture group (p < 0.01). At post-test, 89% in the VR group vs. 62% in the lecture group achieved "good" knowledge (≥ 9/12; p = 0.002). ANCOVA indicated a significant between-group difference in post-test knowledge after adjustment for baseline (pre-test) knowledge, favoring the VR group. The VR system showed high usability (SUS = 84.6/100).
conclusionPreparing nursing students to respond effectively to in-hospital fires is essential. In this pilot study, VR fire-safety training produced larger immediate knowledge gains than the time-matched lecture group and was rated highly usable, supporting its integration as a supplementary educational strategy.
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.