Claims

A pilot RCT found simulation workshop participants 16 times more likely to be assessed as competent in debridement skills and more confident than controls

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q3
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.

q3 i? In a pilot-RCT of podiatry students, the simulation-plus-placement group was 16 times more likely to be assessed as competent in debridement skills and reported increased confidence compared with the clinical-placement-only group. → Anning Naomi 2024

Evidence

Anning Naomi 2024

Anning Naomi, Tehan Peta. (2024). Simulation in podiatry teaching and learning: A scoping review. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. https://doi.org/10.1002/jfa2.70020

q3 · i? · review · r2

Pilot-RCT (Grollo et al., as charted in Table 1) comparing a simulation workshop using a medical foot-care model for sharp debridement practice plus clinical placement against clinical placement alone in podiatry students. The review reports the intervention group was "16 times more likely to be assessed as competent" and reported increased confidence; no effect size is printed.

"Intervention group 16 times more likely to be assessed as competent in debridement skills Intervention group reported increased confidence in skills compared with the control group"

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.