Online simulation training costs as little as 29% of mannequin-based simulation training with no quantitative difference in learning¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q1
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Cost-utility analysis found online simulation training results in no quantitative differences in learning or performance but can be administered at as little as 29% of the cost of mannequin-based simulation training. → Blackwood Lachlan 2025

Evidence¶

Blackwood Lachlan 2025¶

Blackwood Lachlan, Hollo Zachary, Amaratunge Lahiru. (2025). Electronic learning methods compared to traditional learning methods in anaesthesia education: a systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07502-2

q1 · i? · review · r3

The review reports a cost-utility analysis finding that online simulation training results in no quantitative differences in learning or performance but can be administered at as little as 29% of the cost of mannequin-based simulation training.

"Additionally cost-utility analysis has found online simulation training results in no quantitative differences in learning or performance, but can be administered at as little as 29% of the cost of mannequin-based simulation training."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Traditional learning outperformed e-learning in studies where mannequin-based simulation was the traditional modality — related
• Among 39 included studies of low-cost simulation in nursing education, hybrid forms were the most common strategy (48.8%), followed by computer-based tools (17.9%) — related
• Simulation Based Education Improves Outcomes — a broader claim this one bears on