Claims

Two included studies allowed participants to act on feedback from an earlier simulation attempt, enabling a 'second go'

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-31 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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.

q2 i? In Anderson et al. (2020) and Yuksel and Unver (2016), participants could act on feedback from an earlier part of the simulation experience, enabling skill and knowledge development and a 'second go'. → Terry Julia 2025

Evidence

Terry Julia 2025

Terry Julia, Wilks Rachel, Davies Joanne. (2025). Simulated learning interventions to improve communication and practice with deaf and hard of hearing patients: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis. Advances in Health Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-025-10452-5

q2 · i? · review · r2

Review synthesis in the Results outcomes section. Yuksel and Unver held three simulations with adjustments made each time in line with clinical decision making, noting improvements in communication with further iterations due to increased practice; Anderson et al. rated performance after each of two simulations with suggestions for improvement.

"Interventions in two studies gave the opportunity for participants to act on feedback from an earlier part of the simulation experience enabling for skill and knowledge development and a 'second go' (Anderson et al., 2020; Yuksel & Unver, 2016)."

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.