ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2026
Expert Evaluation of a Medical Simulation Model for Cervical Examination to Assess Progress of Labor in Nursing and Midwifery Education: A Collaborative Technology Innovation.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cervical examination is a crucial procedure for assessing labor progress in nursing and midwifery education; however, it may cause discomfort for parturients and provide limited opportunities for repeated practice among nursing and midwifery students. Simulation-based learning offers a safe environment to enhance learners' competence and confidence before clinical practice. Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the Technology Innovation for Cervical Examination-Labor Progress Assessment Model Set (TICE-LpAms) through expert assessment. Methods: This study reports the expert evaluation phase of a model development process. Seventeen experts, including nursing instructors (n = 8) from the Srisavarindhira Thai Red Cross Institute of Nursing and nurse-midwives (n = 7) and obstetricians (n = 2) from King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, evaluated the TICE-LpAms after hands-on use. A structured questionnaire assessed realism, usability, durability, educational applicability, cost-effectiveness, and overall satisfaction using Likert-scale items, with open-ended questions for additional comments and recommendations. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative responses were summarized descriptively. Results: Overall satisfaction with TICE-LpAms was rated as "strongly agree" by 70.6% (n = 12) and "agree" by 29.4% (n = 5) of experts. Experts perceived TICE-LpAms as realistic (Mean = 4.68, SD = 0.25) and cost-effective (Mean = 4.53, SD = 0.51). High ratings were also reported for educational applicability, including teaching cervical examination for labor progress assessment (Mean = 4.82, SD = 0.62), evaluating learners' performance (Mean = 4.71, SD = 0.47), and demonstrating cervical examination procedures (Mean = 4.65, SD = 0.49). The integrated endoscopic camera was recognized beneficially for real-time visualization and instructor feedback during simulation training. Conclusion: TICE-LpAms demonstrated favorable expert evaluations and may serve as a promising, cost-effective simulation-based teaching tool for cervical examination to assess progress of labor in nursing and midwifery education. Further studies should evaluate its educational effectiveness among students and examine implementation outcomes.
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.