2019
DOI: 10.7475/kjan.2019.31.6.595
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and Effectiveness of an Oncology Nursing Standardized Patient Simulation Program for Nursing Students

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
11
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
4
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, we believe that using the same lecture and scenario as in this study might lead to similar knowledge improvement when used in other settings. Indeed, a study [ 53 ] using the similar methods as in our study showed similar results. Moreover, in using lectures in practical education, the PRP method can be useful to acquire knowledge of standard precautions [ 31 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Furthermore, we believe that using the same lecture and scenario as in this study might lead to similar knowledge improvement when used in other settings. Indeed, a study [ 53 ] using the similar methods as in our study showed similar results. Moreover, in using lectures in practical education, the PRP method can be useful to acquire knowledge of standard precautions [ 31 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Several studies have showed had high satisfaction scores for simulation program on communication with standardized patients (Hsu et al, 2015), in applied situations where these skills were a priority such as in oncology (Jang et al, 2019) or mental health (Goh et al, 2016) contexts, or in programs focused on technical-skills training (Luctkar-Flude et al, 2012). However, Oh et al (2015) in their meta-analysis about the effects of simulation-based learning using standardized patients in nursing students, did not show a significant improvement in the students' perceived learning satisfaction, perhaps because of the high heterogeneity of the group included in the review.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most of the articles reviewed were experimental studies (n = 10) with intervention or SBL or experiments or tests, or education groups and control groups [ 11 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 22 , 24 , 25 ]. There were three mixed method studies [ 11 , 20 , 23 ], one semi-experimental study [ 13 ], one evaluation study [ 21 ], and one study based on the Q-methodology [ 16 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Post-scenario self-assessment showed higher competence than pre-scenario self-assessment ( p < 0.001). Other parameters assessed were: self-confidence [ 21 , 23 , 25 ] and self-satisfaction [ 11 , 15 , 21 , 23 , 25 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%