Claims

Simulation training reached Kirkpatrick level 3 (behavioral change) in five studies, but no study assessed patient outcomes

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · 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.

q2 i? Five included studies showed behavioral changes after training, reaching Kirkpatrick level 3; two studies assessed level 2; patient outcomes were not assessed in any study. → Nouira Hajer 2024

Evidence

Nouira Hajer 2024

Nouira Hajer, Jaoued Oussama, Ouanes Islem, Jrad Maissa, Chtioui Soumaya, Gharbi Rim, Fekih Hassen Mohamed, Ben Sik Ali Habiba, Elatrous Souheil. (2024). Implementation of simulation training in the Intensive Care Units (ICU) during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review. La Tunisie Médicale. https://doi.org/10.62438/tunismed.v102i8.4972

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review's structured synthesis of Kirkpatrick levels across its seven included studies. It reports behavioral change evidence at level 3 and notes the highest level, patient outcomes, was never evaluated.

"In addition, five studies showed behavioral changes after training and thus the simulation reached Kirkpatrick level 3. Two studies assessed Kirkpatrick level 2. The impact of training on patient outcomes has not been assessed in any study."

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.