Simulation in undergraduate m edical education
It appears that training in simulated environments confers benefits in terms of formative feedback, and collaborative learning if appropriately structured (as outlined above).
Abstract
In this issue, Hallikainen et al. [1] describe medical student performance at induction of anaesthesia following standardized training provided either in a clinical or a simulated environment. Those students who received training in the simulated environment performed better when assessed using the (same) simulator 1–3 weeks later. The authors describe a framework, which employed many of the features of simulation known to lead to effective learning, as documented by the Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) group [2]. These include the provision of feedback, repetitive practice, curriculum integration, a range of levels of difficulty, multiple learning strategies, the need to capture clinical variation, a controlled environment, individualized learning, reproducible standardized educational experiences in which learners are active participants not passive bystanders, defined outcomes and simulator validity. It appears that training in simulated environments confers benefits in terms of formative feedback, and collaborative learning if appropriately structured (as outlined above).