Claims

Skill retention after simulation is rarely measured; at 2-month follow-up only the VR group maintained significant ISVS improvement

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · 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.

q3 i? Only 2 of 20 studies followed up over time; at 2 months only the VR group retained a significant improvement in Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale scores (P=.047), with no between-group differences. → González-Sanz A 2026

Evidence

González-Sanz A 2026

González-Sanz A, López-García JC, Sutil-Rodríguez E, Juárez-Vela R, Santos-Sánchez JÁ, Navas-Echazarreta N, Martínez-Sabater A, Sancho-Sanchez C. (2026). Simulation-Based Training for Nursing Students to Improve Patient Safety: Systematic Review. JMIR Nursing. https://doi.org/10.2196/87898

q3 · i? · review · r2

RCT of 120 medical and nursing students comparing VR with live simulation, assessed at baseline, posttest, and 2 months. The review reports the printed P=.047 within-group VR result and no between-group differences.

"At 2-month follow-up, only the VR group maintained a significant improvement in Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale scores (P=.047), although no statistically significant differences were found between groups at any time point, suggesting comparable effectiveness"

Discussion

Learner Variables

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.