For psychomotor outcomes, medium-fidelity simulation (1.76), standardized patients (1.27), and high-fidelity simulation (1.03) show the largest effect sizes¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 In the psychomotor domain, the effect-size order was MFS (1.76), SP (1.27), and HFS (1.03), indicating technical training with MFS may be most helpful for psychomotor outcomes. → 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 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r3

Subgroup analysis of psychomotor learning outcomes by fidelity level in the 40-study meta-analysis (Table 4). The psychomotor effect sizes were MFS ES = 1.76, SP ES = 1.27, and HFS ES = 1.03; the discussion states "the order was MFS (1.76), SP (1.27), and HFS (1.03)", which the authors say concurs with the reported lack of positive association between fidelity and process skills.

"In the psychomotor domain, the order was MFS (1.76), SP (1.27), and HFS (1.03)."

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