IVR simulation significantly improves nursing students' self-efficacy but not satisfaction or confidence¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r2–r3 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i1 Five RCTs showed IVR significantly improved self-efficacy (Hedges' g = 0.38, 95% CI 0.04–0.72). → Li Xia 2026 q3 i? Nine studies showed no significant effect on satisfaction (g = 0.88, 95% CI −0.18–1.94) and eight showed none on confidence (g = 0.50, 95% CI −0.16–1.17). → Li Xia 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Li Xia 2026¶

Li Xia, Hu Yanling, Peng Hanmei, Luo Shiqi, Yang Chunsong, Luo Biru, Wan Xingli, Li Yuan, Laredo-Aguilera Jose Alberto. (2026). Effects of Immersive Virtual Reality Simulation on Nursing Students’ Learning Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis. Journal of Nursing Management. https://doi.org/10.1155/jonm/4686851

q3 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r2

Random-effects meta-analysis of 5 RCTs measuring self-efficacy in nursing students. Pooled Hedges' g = 0.38 (95% CI: 0.04–0.72), I² = 73.3%; sensitivity analyses showed self-efficacy was susceptible to influence from specific study exclusions.

"five studies assessing self‐efficacy [17, 20, 38, 39, 44] demonstrated that IVR significantly improved nursing students’ self‐efficacy compared with conventional education (Hedges’ g = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.04–0.72), with substantial heterogeneity observed across studies (I 2 = 73.3%)"

Li Xia 2026 (2)¶

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Random-effects meta-analyses of 9 studies for satisfaction and 8 for confidence found no significant differences versus conventional education; confidence pooled g = 0.50 (95% CI: −0.16–1.17) with I² = 91.9%. Both affective outcomes showed very high heterogeneity.

"Nine studies evaluated satisfaction [18, 30–34, 38, 39, 41], and the random‐effects meta‐analysis indicated that IVR did not significantly enhance nursing students’ satisfaction compared with conventional educational methods (Hedges’ g = 0.88, 95% CI: −0.18–1.94), though very high heterogeneity was observed across studies (I 2 = 95.8%)"

Discussion¶

Page metadata

Field	Value
`status`	`review`
`generated`	by `process:wiki-ingest` on `2026-10-31`
`trust`	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.