The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reconsidering Fidelity in Simulation-Based Training
Abstract
In simulation-based health professions education, the concept of simulator fidelity is usually understood as the degree to which a simulator looks, feels, and acts like a human patient. Although this can be a useful guide in designing simulators, this definition emphasizes technological advances and physical resemblance over principles of educational effectiveness. In fact, several empirical studies have shown that the degree of fidelity appears to be independent of educational effectiveness. The authors confronted these issues while conducting a recent systematic review of simulation-based health professions education, and in this Perspective they use their experience in conducting that review to examine key concepts and assumptions surrounding the topic of fidelity in simulation.Several concepts typically associated with fidelity are more useful in explaining educational effectiveness, such as transfer of learning, learner engagement, and suspension of disbelief. Given that these concepts more directly influence properties of the learning experience, the authors make the following recommendations: (1) abandon the term fidelity in simulation-based health professions education and replace it with terms reflecting the underlying primary concepts of physical resemblance and functional task alignment; (2) make a shift away from the current emphasis on physical resemblance to a focus on functional correspondence between the simulator and the applied context; and (3) focus on methods to enhance educational effectiveness using principles of transfer of learning, learner engagement, and suspension of disbelief. These recommendations clarify underlying concepts for researchers in simulation-based health professions education and will help advance this burgeoning field.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Barry Issenberg, S., Mcgaghie, W. C., Petrusa, E. R., Lee Gordon, D., & Scalese, R. J. (2005) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/01421590500046924 · Cited by 3,966
Ericsson, K. A. (2004) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-200410001-00022 · Cited by 2,988
Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2010) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03498.x · Cited by 1,511
Learning in and about complex systems
Sterman, J. D. (1994) · System Dynamics Review · doi:10.1002/sdr.4260100214 · Cited by 1,279
Evaluating Clinical Simulations for Learning Procedural Skills: A Theory-Based Approach
Kneebone, R. (2005) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-200506000-00006 · Cited by 423
Cited by
Simulation-Based Learning in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis
Chernikova, O., Heitzmann, N., Stadler, M., Holzberger, D., Seidel, T., & Fischer, F. (2020) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654320933544 · Cited by 1,072
A contemporary approach to validity arguments: a practical guide to Kane's framework
Cook, D. A., Brydges, R., Ginsburg, S., & Hatala, R. (2015) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.12678 · Cited by 554
Self-citationValidation of educational assessments: a primer for simulation and beyond
Cook, D. A., & Hatala, R. (2016) · Advances in Simulation · doi:10.1186/s41077-016-0033-y · Cited by 304
Self-citationDankbaar, M. E. W., Alsma, J., Jansen, E. E. H., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., van Saase, J. L. C. M., & Schuit, S. C. E. (2016) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-015-9641-x · Cited by 147
Liaw, S. Y., Tan, J. Z., Bin Rusli, K. D., Ratan, R., Zhou, W., Lim, S., Lau, T. C., Seah, B., & Chua, W. L. (2023) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/47748 · Cited by 87
Metadata
- Authors
- Hamstra, S. J., Brydges, R., Hatala, R., Zendejas, B., & Cook, D. A.
- Venue
- Academic Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-03
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 387-392
- ISSN
- 1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2322558727
- Cited by
- 624
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 22.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reconsidering Fidelity in Simulation-Based Training. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/acm.0000000000000130
- The paper
- Hamstra, S. J., Brydges, R., Hatala, R., Zendejas, B., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Reconsidering Fidelity in Simulation-Based Training. Academic Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000130
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.