↓ Skip to main content

The effects of an enhanced simulation programme on medical students’ confidence responding to clinical deterioration

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 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
The effects of an enhanced simulation programme on medical students’ confidence responding to clinical deterioration
Published in
BMC Medical Education, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0685-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

George Hogg, David Miller

Abstract

Clinical deterioration in adult hospital patients is an identified issue in healthcare practice globally. Teaching medical students to recognise and respond to the deteriorating patient is crucial if we are to address the issue in an effective way. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of an enhanced simulation exercise known as RADAR (Recognising Acute Deterioration: Active Response), on medical students' confidence. A questionnaire survey was conducted; the instrument contained three sections. Section 1 focused on students' perceptions of the learning experience; section 2 investigated confidence. Both sections employed Likert-type scales. A third section invited open responses. Questionnaires were distributed to a cohort of third-year medical students (n = 158) in the North East of Scotland 130 (82 %) were returned for analysis, employing IBM SPSS v18 and ANOVA techniques. Students' responses pointed to many benefits of the sessions. In the first section, students responded positively to the educational underpinning of the sessions, with all scores above 4.00 on a 5-point scale. There were clear learning outcomes; the sessions were active and engaging for students with an appropriate level of challenge and stress; they helped to integrate theory and practice; and effective feedback on their performance allowed students to reflect and learn from the experience. In section 2, the key finding was that scores for students' confidence to recognise deterioration increased significantly (p. < .001) as a result of the sessions. Effect sizes (Eta(2)) were high, (0.68-0.75). In the open-ended questions, students pointed to many benefits of the RADAR course, including the opportunity to employ learned procedures in realistic scenarios. The use of this enhanced form of simulation with simulated patients and the judicious use of moulage is an effective method of increasing realism for medical students. Importantly, it gives them greater confidence in recognising and responding to clinical deterioration in adult patients. We recommend the use of RADAR as a safe and cost-effective approach in the area of clinical deterioration and suggest that there is a need to investigate its use with different patient groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 18%
Student > Master 19 15%
Researcher 18 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Professor 4 3%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 38 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 15%
Psychology 4 3%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 47 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 July 2016.
All research outputs
#14,637,124
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,748
of 4,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,908
of 361,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#39
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,055 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 361,393 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.