↓ Skip to main content

Are simulated patients effective in facilitating development of clinical competence for healthcare students? A scoping review

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Simulation, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Are simulated patients effective in facilitating development of clinical competence for healthcare students? A scoping review
Published in
Advances in Simulation, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41077-016-0006-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brett Williams, Jane Jee Yeon Song

Abstract

The need to evaluate the effectiveness of SPs in improving clinical competence has attracted a heightened interest across the healthcare professions, with some prevailing gaps in their evidence. Using a scoping review approach, this study aims to provide an overview on the effectiveness of SPs in facilitating the development of clinical competence for healthcare students. This scoping review applied the first five out of the six-stage methodological framework developed by Levac et al. (Implementation Science 5:69), as follows: 1) Identify the research question; 2) identify relevant studies; 3) study selection; 4) charting the data; and 5) collating, summarising and reporting the results. The search was performed on four databases, including Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Scopus. A total of 33 articles were included in this study (out of 968 identified), comprising of 20 cross-sectional studies, eight randomised controlled trials and five longitudinal studies. The studies were examined and categorised for further discussion in the three domains of clinical competence; technical, non-technical and cognitive skills. Overall, 24 out of 33 studies showed effectiveness of SPs in facilitating students' clinical competence. This scoping review serves to provide guidance for future healthcare education development, by illustrating the effectiveness of SPs in improving students' clinical competence as evidenced in the literature. In doing so, it highlights the potential of SPs in facilitating students' acquisition of the necessary skills for clinical practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 111 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 12 11%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Researcher 10 9%
Other 34 30%
Unknown 23 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 15%
Psychology 7 6%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Engineering 4 4%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 29 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 March 2016.
All research outputs
#6,908,147
of 22,849,304 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Simulation
#188
of 233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,183
of 297,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Simulation
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,849,304 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 233 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 297,534 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.