ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
Effectiveness of Simulation-Based Training Versus Traditional Lecturing for Outbreak Investigation Among Medical Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Training in outbreak investigation is essential for public health readiness. This study examines how simulation-based training improves medical students' outbreak investigation skills compared to conventional lecture techniques. Methods: We conducted a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) at Combined Military Hospital (CMH) Lahore Medical College over an eleven-month period. Participants were recruited from 4th-year MBBS students without any prior outbreak investigation training. Participants were randomized to control (lecture) (n = 45) and intervention (simulation) (n = 42) groups. Simulation-based training involving a Cholera outbreak scenario was compared to traditional lecture-based teaching. Pre and post-intervention assessments were used to measure knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Statistical analyses included t-tests and descriptive statistics. Results: Simulation-based training resulted in a significantly greater improvement in knowledge and skills compared to the control group (p < 0.001). No statistically significant improvement in attitudes was observed (p = 0.068 within simulation group; p = 0.866 between groups). Discussion: Simulation-based training was associated with greater improvement in knowledge and skills than traditional lecture-based teaching, while no significant difference was observed in attitudes. Although both groups showed increases in scores, simulation-based training was associated with greater improvement in knowledge and skills related to outbreak investigation. The outcomes specify that in order to achieve complex learning requirements, medical education needs a variety of scholastic approaches. Conclusion: Simulation-based training was associated with greater improvement in knowledge and skills compared to traditional teaching. To augment educational outcomes and qualify aspiring healthcare professionals for real-world challenges, preceptors should think about incorporating simulation-based training into their curriculum.
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.