Observational studyBMC medical education2026
Implementing team-based sequential simulation for medical students in clinical clerkship: preliminary findings and learning efficiency evaluation.
Observational study in BMC medical education, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSimulation is a key teaching tool for preparing medical students for clinical practice. Combining team-based learning with sequential simulation enhances problem-solving skills. The Clinical Learning through Extended Immersion in Medical Simulation (CLEIMS), a week-long program integrating simulated interprofessional education, has shown promising results at Griffith University. However, its application outside Australia remains largely unexamined. This study herein evaluates the feasibility of a modified 'CLEIMS' (mCLEIMS), condensed into a 2-day course, for second-year clinical clerkship (SY-CC) students. We analyze preliminary results, learners' perceptions, and learning efficiency through Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) certification. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective, non-randomized controlled observational study enrolled 108 SY-CC students across three sessions (36 per session) from August to November 2020. All participants completed the 2-day mCLEIMS program, which included simulated patient assessment, on-call modules, handoff/briefing, suturing, interprofessional ward rounds, and high-fidelity ACLS training for cardiac arrest. Afterward, they completed a questionnaire assessing satisfaction, learning perception, and core competencies. All SY-CC students, including those in mCLEIMS, underwent ACLS training and exams before January 2021. Questionnaire and ACLS exam results were analyzed using appropriate statistical tests, with statistical significance set at a two-sided p value < 0.05. Open-ended responses were analyzed using thematic analysis, in which recurring concepts were coded and grouped into major themes through investigator discussion and consensus.
resultsThe questionnaire response rate was 99.1% (n = 107), with a global satisfaction score of 4.93 (5-point Likert scale). Most participants reported gaining competencies in interprofessional education (87.0%), communication and clinical needs (84.1%), teamwork and empathy (84.1%), and professional knowledge and skills (76.6%). Open-ended responses highlighted mCLEIMS' role in providing real-world medical experience (51.5%), particularly through simulation patients (32.0%) and interprofessional education (20.6%). ACLS pass rates were higher for mCLEIMS participants (96.8% vs. 84.7%, p = 0.012), who also scored better on the exam (83.1 ± 7.4 vs. 76.8 ± 18.1, p = 0.007).
conclusionOur experience suggests that mCLEIMS is a practical teaching tool for SY-CC students, integrating team-based sequential simulation to enhance learning perception and ACLS skill retention before clinical practice.
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.