For cognitive outcomes, high-fidelity simulation shows the largest effect size (0.50)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 For cognitive outcomes, the effect size was highest for HFS (0.50), followed by LFS (0.47), SP (0.32), and MFS (0.06). → 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 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r3

Subgroup analysis of learning outcomes by fidelity level in the 40-study meta-analysis (Table 4). The cognitive effect size for HFS was ES = 0.50; the results section states it was "the highest for HFS (0.50), followed by LFS (0.47), SP (0.32), and MFS (0.06)"; the MFS cognitive estimate rested on a single effect size.

"For cognitive outcome, which is a sub-domain of learning, the effect size was the highest for HFS (0.50), followed by LFS (0.47), SP (0.32), and MFS (0.06)."

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
• High-fidelity simulation shows only small-to-moderate benefits over low-fidelity simulation in skill performance (SMD 0.64) and knowledge (SMD 0.39) — related
• HF simulation improves ALS knowledge at course conclusion more than LF simulation or traditional training (pooled SMD = 0.38) — related
• For psychomotor outcomes, medium-fidelity simulation (1.76), standardized patients (1.27), and high-fidelity simulation (1.03) show the largest effect sizes — related