A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

A Mixed-methods Comparison of Participant and Observer Learner Roles in Simulation Education. | LitMetric

Background: Traditional simulation-based education prioritizes participation in simulated scenarios. The educational impact of observation in simulation-based education compared with participation remains uncertain. Our objective was to compare the performances of observers and participants in a standardized simulation scenario.

Methods: We assessed learning differences between simulation-based scenario participation and observation using a convergent, parallel, quasi-experimental, mixed-methods study of 15 participants and 15 observers ( = 30). Fifteen first-year residents from six medical specialties were evaluated during a simulated scenario (cardiac arrest due to critical hyperkalemia). Evaluation included predefined critical actions and performance assessments. In the first exposure to the simulation scenario, participants and observers underwent a shared postevent debriefing with predetermined learning objectives. Three months later, a follow-up assessment using the same case scenario evaluated all 30 learners as participants. Wilcoxon signed rank and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to compare participants and observers at 3-month follow-up. In addition, we used case study methodology to explore the nature of learning for participants and observers. Data were triangulated using direct observations, reflective field notes, and a focus group.

Results: Quantitative data analysis comparing the learners' first and second exposure to the investigation scenario demonstrated participants' time to calcium administration as the only statistically significant difference between participant and observer roles (316 seconds vs. 200 seconds, p = 0.0004). Qualitative analysis revealed that both participation and observation improved learning, debriefing was an important component to learning, and debriefing closed the learning gap between observers and participants.

Conclusions: Participants and observers had similar performances in simulation-based learning in an isolated scenario of cardiac arrest due to hyperkalemia. Findings support current limited literature that observation should not be underestimated as an important opportunity to enhance simulation-based education. When paired with postevent debriefing, scenario observers and participants may reap similar educational benefits.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6339532PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10310DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

participants observers
20
simulation-based education
12
participant observer
8
observers
8
participants
8
observers participants
8
participation observation
8
scenario cardiac
8
cardiac arrest
8
postevent debriefing
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!