The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning
Abstract
Medical Education 2012 Context High‐fidelity simulators have enjoyed increasing popularity despite costs that may approach six figures. This is justified on the basis that simulators have been shown to result in large learning gains that may transfer to actual patient care situations. However, most commonly, learning from a simulator is compared with learning in a ‘no‐intervention’ control group. This fails to clarify the relationship between simulator fidelity and learning, and whether comparable gains might be achieved at substantially lower cost. Objectives This analysis was conducted to review studies that compare learning from high‐fidelity simulation (HFS) with learning from low‐fidelity simulation (LFS) based on measures of clinical performance. Methods Using a variety of search strategies, a total of 24 studies contrasting HFS and LFS and including some measure of performance were located. These studies referred to learning in three areas: auscultation skills; surgical techniques, and complex management skills such as cardiac resuscitation. Results Both HFS and LFS learning resulted in consistent improvements in performance in comparisons with no‐intervention control groups. However, nearly all the studies showed no significant advantage of HFS over LFS, with average differences ranging from 1% to 2%. Discussion The factors influencing learning, and the reasons for this surprising finding, are discussed.
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
Seymour, N. E., Gallagher, A. G., Roman, S. A., O’Brien, M. K., Bansal, V. K., Andersen, D. K., & Satava, R. M. (2002) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/00000658-200210000-00008 · Cited by 2,853
Cook, D. A., Hatala, R., Brydges, R., Zendejas, B., Szostek, J. H., Wang, A. T., Erwin, P. J., & Hamstra, S. J. (2011) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2011.1234 · Cited by 2,170
A critical review of simulation‐based medical education research: 2003–2009
McGaghie, W. C., Issenberg, S. B., Petrusa, E. R., & Scalese, R. J. (2010) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03547.x · Cited by 1,733
CONTEXT‐DEPENDENT MEMORY IN TWO NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS: ON LAND AND UNDERWATER
GODDEN, D. R., & BADDELEY, A. D. (1975) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01468.x · Cited by 1,686
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
Low‐ to high‐fidelity simulation – a continuum of medical education?
Maran, N. J., & Glavin, R. J. (2003) · Medical Education · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.37.s1.9.x · Cited by 943
Simulation Technology for Health Care Professional Skills Training and Assessment
Issenberg, S. B. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.9.861 · Cited by 914
Wayne, D. B., Didwania, A., Feinglass, J., Fudala, M. J., Barsuk, J. H., & McGaghie, W. C. (2008) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.07-0131 · Cited by 677
Use of Simulation-Based Education to Reduce Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infections
Barsuk, J. H., Cohen, E. R., Feinglass, J., McGaghie, W. C., & Wayne, D. B. (2009) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2009.215 · Cited by 567
Cited by
Reconsidering Fidelity in Simulation-Based Training
Hamstra, S. J., Brydges, R., Hatala, R., Zendejas, B., & Cook, D. A. (2014) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000130 · Cited by 624
Effectiveness of patient simulation in nursing education: Meta-analysis
Shin, S., Park, J.-H., & Kim, J.-H. (2015) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2014.09.009 · Cited by 543
Sørensen, J. L., Østergaard, D., LeBlanc, V., Ottesen, B., Konge, L., Dieckmann, P., & Van der Vleuten, C. (2017) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0838-3 · Cited by 267
Dankbaar, 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
Huang, H., Hwang, G.-J., & Jong, M. S.-Y. (2022) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104593 · Cited by 57
Metadata
- Authors
- Norman, G., Dore, K., & Grierson, L.
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-05-23
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 636-647
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W1687253533
- Cited by
- 591
- References
- 35
- FWCI
- 21.32
- 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: The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04243.x
- The paper
- Norman, G., Dore, K., & Grierson, L. (2012). The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04243.x
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.
