CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 565Simulation-Based Education in HealthcareInnovations in Medical EducationSurgical Simulation and Training

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Simulation-based training is superior to problem-based learning for the acquisition of critical assessment and management skills*

Steadman, Randolph H., Coates, Wendy C., Huang, Yue Ming, Matevosian, Rima, Larmon, Baxter R., McCullough, Lynne, Ariel, Danit·2006·Critical Care Medicine
DOI 10.1097/01.ccm.0000190619.42013.94
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether full-scale simulation (SIM) is superior to interactive problem-based learning (PBL) for teaching medical students acute care assessment and management skills. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Simulation center at a U.S. medical school. SUBJECTS: Thirty-one fourth-year medical students in a week-long acute care course. INTERVENTIONS: After institutional review board approval and informed consent, eligible students were randomized to either the SIM or PBL group. On day 1, all subjects underwent a simulator-based initial assessment designed to evaluate their critical care skills. Two blinded investigators assessed each student using a standardized checklist. Subsequently, the PBL group learned about dyspnea in a standard PBL format. The SIM group learned about dyspnea using the simulator. To equalize simulator education time, the PBL group learned about acute abdominal pain on the simulator, whereas the SIM group used the PBL format. On day 5, each student was tested on a unique dyspnea scenario. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mean initial assessment and final assessment checklist scores and their change for the SIM and PBL groups were compared using the Student's t-test. A p < .05 was considered significant. The SIM and PBL groups had similar mean (PBL 0.44, SIM 0.47, p = .64) initial assessment scores (earned score divided by maximum score) and were deemed equivalent. The SIM group performed better than the PBL group on the final assessment (mean, PBL 0.53, SIM 0.72, p < .0001). When each student's change in score (percent correct on final assessment minus percent correct on the initial assessment) was compared, SIM group students performed better (mean improvement, SIM 25 percentage points vs. PBL 8 percentage points, p < .04) CONCLUSIONS: For fourth-year medical students, simulation-based learning was superior to problem-based learning for the acquisition of critical assessment and management skills.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.ccm.0000190619.42013.94

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 47 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Nehring, 2004, Nurs Educ Perspect, 25, 244
  2. Vardi, 2002, Isr Med Assoc J, 4, 540

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 565

Related

Metadata

Authors
Steadman, R. H., Coates, W. C., Huang, Y. M., Matevosian, R., Larmon, B. R., McCullough, L., & Ariel, D.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
ORCID
Venue
Critical Care Medicine
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2006-01
Volume
34
Issue
1
Pages
151-157
ISSN
0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/01.ccm.0000190619.42013.94
OpenAlex
W2081482807
Cited by
565
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 40 · 2012: 29
FWCI
11.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Critical Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Simulation and Training
Keywords
simulation-based training, problem-based learning, medical education, dyspnea, acute abdominal pain, medical students, skill acquisition
MeSH terms
Adult, Clinical Competence, Critical Care, Curriculum, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Educational Measurement, Female, Humans, Male, Sensitivity and Specificity, Students, Medical, Patient Simulation, Critical Illness, Problem-Based Learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review