The DOI matches its Crossref record.
An evaluation of the effectiveness of a computer simulation of anaesthetic uptake and distribution as a teaching tool
Abstract
Summary. Gas Man® is an interactive, microcomputer‐based simulation and tutorial designed to teach the principles of anaesthetic uptake and distribution. Using two resident groups, one at a primary university‐teaching hospital and the other at a medical school affiliated community hospital, the authors compared residents' knowledge of the subject prior to exposure to the tutorial and the average time spent using the program during a self‐paced instruction period. Both groups not only significantly improved their knowledge of uptake and distribution 8 weeks after using this program, but wished to spend additional time with it, implying that it was a pleasant and satisfying way to learn. Computer simulation has the potential to be an important teaching tool in an anaesthesia residency training programme.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Balanced anesthesia using low or minimal fresh gas flow (≤ 1 L·min-1) during the wash-in period and metabolic fresh gas flow (0.35 L·min-1) during steady-state maintenance reduces CO2 emissions and costs by approximately 50%.”
From A call for immediate climate action in anesthesiology: routine use of minimal or metabolic fresh gas flow reduces our ecological footprint (2023) · cites this paper as [54]
In the citing paper
“For both inhalational anesthetics, a decrease of FGF from 4 to 1 L·min-1 decreases the consumption of inhalational anesthetic by 45.3% (desflurane) and 51.8% (sevoflurane), respectively.”
From A call for immediate climate action in anesthesiology: routine use of minimal or metabolic fresh gas flow reduces our ecological footprint (2023) · cites this paper as [54]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Cited by
Rübsam, M.-L., Kruse, P., Dietzler, Y., Kropf, M., Bette, B., Zarbock, A., Kim, S.-C., & Hönemann, C. (2023) · Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie · doi:10.1007/s12630-022-02393-z · Cited by 39
“approximately 45–50% of CO2e emission and costs per minute GA (Table 3).(54)”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- GARFIELD, J. M., PASKIN, S., & PHILIP, J. H.
- Affiliations
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- GARFIELD, J. M.
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1989-09
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 457-462
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W2023832507
- Cited by
- 47
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 1.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Education (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Anatomy and Medical Technology
- Keywords
- computer simulation, interactive tutorials, knowledge retention, self-paced instruction, medical residents
- MeSH terms
- Anesthesiology, Anesthetics, Computer-Assisted Instruction, Computer Simulation, Internship and Residency, Microcomputers
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
