Self-regulated versus instructor-guided feedback in competency-based simulation shows a negligible, non-significant pooled difference¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Meta-analysis of 7 studies comparing self-regulated with instructor-guided feedback found a negligible pooled effect (SMD = 0.10, 95% CI −0.33 to 0.53, P = 0.64). → Vermylen JH 2026

Evidence¶

Vermylen JH 2026¶

Vermylen JH, Cohen ER, Cook DA, McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Arnold J, Ballard H, Bayoumi M, Beestrum M, Bremner R, Crawford S, Einstein N, Mannarino C, Misra A, Tomita TM, Waldron H, Yanko F, Kessler DO. (2026). Competency-Based Simulation Training for Procedural Skills: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Simulation in Healthcare. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000895

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Random-effects meta-analysis of 7 studies (15%) comparing the source of feedback (self-regulated versus instructor-guided) in competency-based simulation, using each study's best outcome. The pooled effect was negligible and not statistically significant, with high inconsistency (I2 = 80).

"Figure 5 shows the meta-analysis for the best outcome with a pooled SMD of 0.10 (95% CI = −0.33 to 0.53, P = 0.64). Inconsistency was again high between studies (I 2 = 80) with effect sizes ranging from −1.38 to 1.07"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Automated versus nonautomated feedback in competency-based simulation shows a negligible, non-significant pooled difference — related
• Competency-based simulation training outperforms noncompetency-based simulation for procedural skill outcomes in health professionals (moderate pooled effect) — related