ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Comparing the effectiveness of online and onsite training for simulation facilitator: a quasi-experiment.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the increasing integration of simulation-based education in healthcare, the role of simulation facilitators has become pivotal. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of online versus onsite training for simulation facilitators. Methods: A quasi-experimental design was employed. Participants were assigned to either an online training group or an onsite training group based on their availability and preference, with both groups receiving identical and synchronized training content. Data were collected at baseline and immediately post-intervention. Results: Of 219 recruited participants, 100 completing the intervention and evaluation (78 online, 22 onsite). Both groups improved significantly in core competencies, with no significant difference in the percentage change between the groups. The online training group demonstrated significant enhancements in debriefing skills and simulation-based education self-efficacy, whereas the onsite group showed improvements that did not reach statistical significance. However, adjusted analyses revealed no statistically significant between-group differences in the percentage change from baseline for simulation facilitator core competency, debriefing skills, simulation-based education self-efficacy, or willingness to use simulation-based education. Conclusion: The findings of this study indicate that online training is as effective as onsite training in improving simulation facilitator core competency and willingness to use simulation-based education. This suggests that online training could be a viable alternative to onsite training.
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.