A Randomized Comparison Trial of Case‐based Learning versus Human Patient Simulation in Medical Student Education

Abstract

HPS training offers no advantage to CBL as measured by medical student performance on a chest pain objective structured clinical examination.

Prospective Randomized Crossover Study of Simulation vs. Didactics for Teaching Medical Students the Assessment and Management of Critically Ill Patients

“…For example, Schwartz et al reported that human patient SIM showed no significant difference in medical student performance (21). However, they noted that baseline academic achievement differences in their study groups occurred despite random assignment, and this may have affected their results (21). By comparing each student's individual SIM score with their individual LEC score, we eliminate confounding due to baseline differences in knowledge, intellect, or test-taking skills.…”

“…By comparing each student's individual SIM score with their individual LEC score, we eliminate confounding due to baseline differences in knowledge, intellect, or test-taking skills. Schwartz et al also noted that students studied on their own, outside of prescribed reading and didactics, and "a difference in study habits between the two intervention groups could potentially mask a difference in the efficacy of the educational modalities tested" (21). This study controlled for this issue, as all students had the same amount of "study time," which included only LEC and SIM time.…”

Comparison of Two Lecture Delivery Platforms in a Hybrid Distance Education Program

“…Students may have a preference for a specific platform, but it may have little influence on performance. 29,30 Conventional wisdom suggests that adapting instruction to students' preferred learning styles should improve their academic performance. However, the literature is mixed and learning preference and learning styles are not consistently associated with academic performance.…”

Unterrichtsprinzipien zur Wiederbelebung

“…"high" vs. "low fidelity simulation") macht den Vergleich unterschiedlicher Studien schwierig. Simulationstraining ging ziemlich konsistent [33,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136], aber nicht generell [137,138,139,140,141,142,143] [187], die Durchführungsfertig-keiten [188], das Selbstvertrauen [189] und die Vertrautheit mit der Umgebung [190] der ALS-Helfer verbessern sowie Fehler im System und bei den Helfern identifizieren [191,192].…”