ArticleBMC nursing2026
Virtual simulation in nursing education: a scoping review.
Article in BMC nursing, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVirtual simulation has become an increasingly used pedagogical approach in nursing education, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite rapid uptake across diverse modalities, a comprehensive map of the evidence covering the post-pandemic surge is lacking. This scoping review systematically maps evidence on virtual simulation in nursing education, identifying technology types, educational applications, research designs, outcome measures, and knowledge gaps to inform future practice and research.
methodsA scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and reported using the PRISMA-ScR checklist; the protocol was retrospectively registered on the Open Science Framework. PubMed, CINAHL (via EBSCOhost), Web of Science Core Collection, and Scopus were searched on 15 January 2026 for English-language peer-reviewed primary research published between January 2019 and December 2025. Two reviewers independently screened records and extracted data, with a third reviewer adjudicating disagreements. Findings were synthesised using descriptive statistics and descriptive categorisation of the extracted data.
resultsOf 5,990 records retrieved, 198 studies were included. Publications rose sharply, increasing from two studies in 2019 to 82 in 2025, with almost two-thirds appearing in 2024-2025 (64.6%). Studies originated predominantly from South Korea (21.2%), the USA (18.7%), and China, Taiwan (11.1%). Interactive immersive virtual reality and 360-degree/180-degree video virtual reality together accounted for 63.1% of studies, followed by screen-based virtual simulation (23.7%); augmented reality accounted for a smaller share (4.0%). Quasi-experimental designs (27.8%) and randomised controlled trials (22.7%) predominated. Self-confidence/self-efficacy (44.4%), knowledge acquisition (42.4%) and satisfaction (39.4%) were the most frequently measured outcomes. Favourable findings were commonly reported for these outcomes among the included studies; however, this review did not chart the direction or magnitude of effects, and no methodological quality appraisal was undertaken.
conclusionsVirtual simulation has been implemented across a broad range of nursing education contexts, and the mapped studies predominantly reported positive learning outcomes; however, limited longitudinal follow-up, geographic concentration in East Asia, small samples, and inconsistent outcome measures constrain the evidence base and warrant standardised, multi-site research. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.