↓ Skip to main content

Issues of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness for simulation in health professions education

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
138 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
Issues of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness for simulation in health professions education
Published in
Advances in Simulation, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41077-016-0020-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen Maloney, Terry Haines

Abstract

Simulation education can be costly-however, costs need to be considered against what you get in return to determine whether these costs are justified. Unfortunately in simulation education, evaluations that yield information about the return on investment are scarce. An economic evaluation provides a comparison of value. In short-what is it that is being obtained, what do you need to give up to get it, and how does that compare to what you get with the next best alternative? When educators are equipped with this knowledge, they will be better informed to know the place that simulation-based learning approaches should take in optimal course structures. This article provides an overview of the costs and consequences associated with simulation in healthcare education. It provides an outline of the benefits of using economic evaluations to inform decision-making by educators and clinicians concerning the most appropriate educational approaches. It also provides guidance for educational researchers interested in investigating the cost and value of their innovations. Measures of cost and value in simulation are required to provide information about the viability and sustainability of simulation education, enabling simulation education in health care to demonstrate its worth.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 138 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 16 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Master 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Other 31 22%
Unknown 41 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 17%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Engineering 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 48 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 06 January 2022.
All research outputs
#2,542,870
of 24,282,284 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Simulation
#118
of 252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,557
of 332,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Simulation
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,282,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 252 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
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 332,351 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.