For reaction outcomes (satisfaction and learning attitudes), high-fidelity simulation shows a larger effect size than low-fidelity simulation¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In the reaction domain, which includes satisfaction and learning attitudes, HFS had a larger effect size than LFS (0.64 vs 0.27 in Table 4). → Kim Junghee 2016

Evidence¶

Kim Junghee 2016¶

Kim Junghee, Park Jin-Hwa, Shin Sujin. (2016). Effectiveness of simulation-based nursing education depending on fidelity: a meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0672-7

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Subgroup analysis of reaction outcomes by fidelity level in the 40-study meta-analysis (Table 4 reports HFS ES 0.64, k = 5; LFS ES 0.27, k = 4). The results section states "The effect size of HFS on reaction was larger than that of LFS"; no effect size is given in the quoted sentence.

"The effect size of HFS on reaction was larger than that of LFS (Table 4)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Effect sizes are larger for high-fidelity simulation, medium-fidelity simulation, and standardized patients than for low-fidelity and hybrid simulation — related
• For affective outcomes, high-fidelity simulation (0.80) and standardized patients (0.73) show the largest effect sizes — related