"Who am i and why am i here?" A scoping review exploring the templates and protocols that direct actors in their roles as simulated (standardized) patients
Simulation in Healthcare, ISSN: 1559-713X, Vol: 16, Issue: 3, Page: 190-198
2021
- 6Citations
- 15Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Review Description
Summary Statement Simulated patients (SPs) are increasingly used in health education and research. The aim of this article was to investigate templates and protocols that enable SPs to accurately and consistently adopt these roles. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews guided the search strategy for articles that detailed such templates or protocols. Embase Classic + Embase, ProQuest ERIC, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMCare, psycINFO, and Scopus were searched, and 17 articles were included in the review. The templates and protocols that were located differed in structure, length, and depth and were developed or used in medical, nursing, allied health, and veterinary medicine disciplines. The validity, reliability, and replicability of studies are explored, and the quality of reporting is evaluated using the Simulation Research Rubric. Recommendations for increasing the rigor of programs and the reporting of research where SPs are adopted are considered.
Bibliographic Details
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know