确定当前评估医疗保健模拟教育质量的方法:范围审查

Rachel Pogson, Helen Henderson, Matt Holland, Agnieszka Sumera, Kacper Sumera, Carl A. Webster
{"title":"确定当前评估医疗保健模拟教育质量的方法:范围审查","authors":"Rachel Pogson, Helen Henderson, Matt Holland, Agnieszka Sumera, Kacper Sumera, Carl A. Webster","doi":"10.12688/mep.19758.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<ns3:p><ns3:bold>Background: </ns3:bold>With an increase in simulation being used in healthcare education, there is a need to ensure the quality of simulation-based education is high. This scoping review was conducted to answer the question: What are the current approaches to the evaluation of the quality of health-care simulation-based education provision?</ns3:p><ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Methods:</ns3:bold> Databases PubMed, Cochrane, ERIC, CINAHL and Medline were searched in March 2023 to retrieve peer-reviewed healthcare research and review articles written in the English language within the last 20 years. All data were extracted from six studies, themed and presented in the main text and in tabular form.</ns3:p><ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Results</ns3:bold>: Two scoping reviews, one systematic review and three research articles were included. Three main themes were found: adherence to existing design frameworks, lack of validation of these frameworks and lack of evaluation frameworks, and a proposed evaluation framework. Many of the excluded articles focussed on gaining participant feedback to evaluate simulation activities, rather than evaluating the quality of the design and implementation of the simulation.</ns3:p><ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Conclusions: </ns3:bold>Benchmarking of current United Kingdom (UK) healthcare simulation against UK and international simulation standards is required to increase its quality, therefore, an agreed UK template framework to evaluate simulation packages is recommended.</ns3:p>","PeriodicalId":74136,"journal":{"name":"MedEdPublish (2016)","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determining current approaches to the evaluation of the quality of healthcare simulation-based education provision: a scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel Pogson, Helen Henderson, Matt Holland, Agnieszka Sumera, Kacper Sumera, Carl A. Webster\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/mep.19758.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<ns3:p><ns3:bold>Background: </ns3:bold>With an increase in simulation being used in healthcare education, there is a need to ensure the quality of simulation-based education is high. This scoping review was conducted to answer the question: What are the current approaches to the evaluation of the quality of health-care simulation-based education provision?</ns3:p><ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Methods:</ns3:bold> Databases PubMed, Cochrane, ERIC, CINAHL and Medline were searched in March 2023 to retrieve peer-reviewed healthcare research and review articles written in the English language within the last 20 years. All data were extracted from six studies, themed and presented in the main text and in tabular form.</ns3:p><ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Results</ns3:bold>: Two scoping reviews, one systematic review and three research articles were included. Three main themes were found: adherence to existing design frameworks, lack of validation of these frameworks and lack of evaluation frameworks, and a proposed evaluation framework. Many of the excluded articles focussed on gaining participant feedback to evaluate simulation activities, rather than evaluating the quality of the design and implementation of the simulation.</ns3:p><ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Conclusions: </ns3:bold>Benchmarking of current United Kingdom (UK) healthcare simulation against UK and international simulation standards is required to increase its quality, therefore, an agreed UK template framework to evaluate simulation packages is recommended.</ns3:p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MedEdPublish (2016)\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MedEdPublish (2016)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/mep.19758.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MedEdPublish (2016)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/mep.19758.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:随着模拟在医疗保健教育中的应用越来越多,有必要确保模拟教育的高质量。进行这一范围审查是为了回答以下问题:目前评估保健模拟教育提供质量的方法是什么?方法:于2023年3月检索PubMed、Cochrane、ERIC、CINAHL和Medline数据库,检索近20年来用英文撰写的同行评议的医疗保健研究和综述文章。所有数据均从六项研究中提取,以正文和表格形式进行主题和呈现。结果:纳入2篇范围综述、1篇系统综述和3篇研究文章。发现了三个主要主题:遵守现有的设计框架,缺乏对这些框架的验证,缺乏评估框架,以及拟议的评估框架。许多被排除在外的文章侧重于获得参与者的反馈来评估模拟活动,而不是评估模拟设计和实现的质量。结论:需要根据英国和国际模拟标准对当前英国(UK)医疗保健模拟进行基准测试,以提高其质量,因此,建议采用商定的英国模板框架来评估模拟包。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Determining current approaches to the evaluation of the quality of healthcare simulation-based education provision: a scoping review.
Background: With an increase in simulation being used in healthcare education, there is a need to ensure the quality of simulation-based education is high. This scoping review was conducted to answer the question: What are the current approaches to the evaluation of the quality of health-care simulation-based education provision? Methods: Databases PubMed, Cochrane, ERIC, CINAHL and Medline were searched in March 2023 to retrieve peer-reviewed healthcare research and review articles written in the English language within the last 20 years. All data were extracted from six studies, themed and presented in the main text and in tabular form. Results: Two scoping reviews, one systematic review and three research articles were included. Three main themes were found: adherence to existing design frameworks, lack of validation of these frameworks and lack of evaluation frameworks, and a proposed evaluation framework. Many of the excluded articles focussed on gaining participant feedback to evaluate simulation activities, rather than evaluating the quality of the design and implementation of the simulation. Conclusions: Benchmarking of current United Kingdom (UK) healthcare simulation against UK and international simulation standards is required to increase its quality, therefore, an agreed UK template framework to evaluate simulation packages is recommended.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信