ArticleCJEM2026
Simulation training in Canadian College of Family Physicians Emergency Medicine (CCFP-EM) programs.
Article in CJEM, 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
objectivesThe Canadian College of Family Physicians Emergency Medicine (CCFP-EM) program offers 1 year of enhanced emergency training following a 2-year family medicine residency. Due to limited training time and unpredictable exposure to high-acuity scenarios, simulation-based education plays a critical role in developing procedural and crisis resource management competencies. This study aimed to characterize simulation use across Canadian CCFP-EM programs, with objectives to 1) describe the volume and delivery of simulation programs, 2) outline curricular content, and 3) explore how simulation is used for assessment.
methodsFrom June 2023 to January 2024, we interviewed 16 out of 17 program representatives from Canadian CCFP-EM programs. Data were collected via both a pre-interview survey and a semi-structured interview. Program representatives included program directors, assistant program directors, or simulation directors.
resultsAll programs reported access to a simulation center, with 25% offering remote or virtual simulation. The median simulation hours provided across programs was 42 h annually, with individual residents participating 40 h on average. Most programs covered core national emergency medicine simulation topics, obtaining cases from their own case bank, or using open-access simulation resources. Most program representatives supported developing a standardized national simulation curriculum, emphasizing the need for flexibility for local adaptation. Only 31% of programs used simulation for assessment, citing concerns over psychological safety, feasibility and standardization. Faculty time and cost were the most cited barriers to simulation in general. Notable innovations included disaster simulations, resident-led peer teaching, and specialist-assisted procedural curriculum.
conclusionOur results provide a starting point for discussion and collaboration across programs, creating opportunities to optimize curricular development and the use of simulation for assessment, while considering resource availability and learner psychological safety. Simulation-based education has been a key educational tool, and educators and program leaders must understand how we are using simulation to teach our residents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42786414What 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.