CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 551Simulation-Based Education in HealthcareInnovations in Medical EducationSurgical Simulation and Training

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical Virtual Simulation in Nursing Education: Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Padilha, José Miguel, Machado, Paulo Puga, Ribeiro, Ana, Ramos, José, Costa, Patrício·2019·Journal of Medical Internet Research
DOI 10.2196/11529PMC PMC6447149

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the field of health care, knowledge and clinical reasoning are key with regard to quality and confidence in decision making. The development of knowledge and clinical reasoning is influenced not only by students' intrinsic factors but also by extrinsic factors such as satisfaction with taught content, pedagogic resources and pedagogic methods, and the nature of the objectives and challenges proposed. Nowadays, professors play the role of learning facilitators rather than simple "lecturers" and face students as active learners who are capable of attributing individual meanings to their personal goals, challenges, and experiences to build their own knowledge over time. Innovations in health simulation technologies have led to clinical virtual simulation. Clinical virtual simulation is the recreation of reality depicted on a computer screen and involves real people operating simulated systems. It is a type of simulation that places people in a central role through their exercising of motor control skills, decision skills, and communication skills using virtual patients in a variety of clinical settings. Clinical virtual simulation can provide a pedagogical strategy and can act as a facilitator of knowledge retention, clinical reasoning, improved satisfaction with learning, and finally, improved self-efficacy. However, little is known about its effectiveness with regard to satisfaction, self-efficacy, knowledge retention, and clinical reasoning. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of clinical virtual simulation with regard to knowledge retention, clinical reasoning, self-efficacy, and satisfaction with the learning experience among nursing students. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial with a pretest and 2 posttests was carried out with Portuguese nursing students (N=42). The participants, split into 2 groups, had a lesson with the same objectives and timing. The experimental group (n=21) used a case-based learning approach, with clinical virtual simulator as a resource, whereas the control group (n=21) used the same case-based learning approach, with recourse to a low-fidelity simulator and a realistic environment. The classes were conducted by the usual course lecturers. We assessed knowledge and clinical reasoning before the intervention, after the intervention, and 2 months later, with a true or false and multiple-choice knowledge test. The students' levels of learning satisfaction and self-efficacy were assessed with a Likert scale after the intervention. RESULTS: The experimental group made more significant improvements in knowledge after the intervention (P=.001; d=1.13) and 2 months later (P=.02; d=0.75), and it also showed higher levels of learning satisfaction (P<.001; d=1.33). We did not find statistical differences in self-efficacy perceptions (P=.9; d=0.054). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of clinical virtual simulation in nursing education has the potential to improve knowledge retention and clinical reasoning in an initial stage and over time, and it increases the satisfaction with the learning experience among nursing students.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/11529

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Johnson, D, 2010, US Army Med Dep J, 9
  2. Duarte, H, 2015, Leiria School of Health
  3. Schwarzer, R, 1995, Measures in Health Psychology: A User's Portfolio. Casual and Control Beliefs, A
  4. Bandura, A, 1986, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, A

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 551

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Padilha, J. M., Machado, P. P., Ribeiro, A., Ramos, J., & Costa, P.
Affiliations
Universidade do Porto (PT)
Corresponding author
Padilha, José Miguel
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Publisher
JMIR Publications Inc.
Published
2019-03-18
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
e11529
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2196/11529
PMC
PMC6447149
OpenAlex
W2908029454
Cited by
550
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 81 · 2025: 79 · 2024: 90 · 2023: 89 · 2022: 87 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 7
FWCI
35.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (01-0145, POCI-01-0145, POCI-01-0145-FEDER-, COMPETE_2020, POCI-01-, POCI-01-0145-FEDER-023342)
  • European Regional Development Fund (POCI-01, COMPETE2020, POCI-01-0145- FEDER)
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
nursing education, virtual patients, clinical reasoning, knowledge retention, self-efficacy, learning satisfaction, case-based learning, low-fidelity simulators, nursing students, simulation-based training
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Education, Nursing, Female, Humans, Male

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