10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Self-regulated learning in simulation-based training: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      , , , , , ,
      Medical Education
      Wiley-Blackwell

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Self-regulated learning (SRL) requires an active learner who has developed a set of processes for managing the achievement of learning goals. Simulation-based training is one context in which trainees can safely practise learning how to learn.

          Related collections

          Most cited references48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

          Although technology-enhanced simulation has widespread appeal, its effectiveness remains uncertain. A comprehensive synthesis of evidence may inform the use of simulation in health professions education. To summarize the outcomes of technology-enhanced simulation training for health professions learners in comparison with no intervention. Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsychINFO, Scopus, key journals, and previous review bibliographies through May 2011. Original research in any language evaluating simulation compared with no intervention for training practicing and student physicians, nurses, dentists, and other health care professionals. Reviewers working in duplicate evaluated quality and abstracted information on learners, instructional design (curricular integration, distributing training over multiple days, feedback, mastery learning, and repetitive practice), and outcomes. We coded skills (performance in a test setting) separately for time, process, and product measures, and similarly classified patient care behaviors. From a pool of 10,903 articles, we identified 609 eligible studies enrolling 35,226 trainees. Of these, 137 were randomized studies, 67 were nonrandomized studies with 2 or more groups, and 405 used a single-group pretest-posttest design. We pooled effect sizes using random effects. Heterogeneity was large (I(2)>50%) in all main analyses. In comparison with no intervention, pooled effect sizes were 1.20 (95% CI, 1.04-1.35) for knowledge outcomes (n = 118 studies), 1.14 (95% CI, 1.03-1.25) for time skills (n = 210), 1.09 (95% CI, 1.03-1.16) for process skills (n = 426), 1.18 (95% CI, 0.98-1.37) for product skills (n = 54), 0.79 (95% CI, 0.47-1.10) for time behaviors (n = 20), 0.81 (95% CI, 0.66-0.96) for other behaviors (n = 50), and 0.50 (95% CI, 0.34-0.66) for direct effects on patients (n = 32). Subgroup analyses revealed no consistent statistically significant interactions between simulation training and instructional design features or study quality. In comparison with no intervention, technology-enhanced simulation training in health professions education is consistently associated with large effects for outcomes of knowledge, skills, and behaviors and moderate effects for patient-related outcomes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            New Conceptualizations of Practice: Common Principles in Three Paradigms Suggest New Concepts for Training

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A meta-analysis of self-regulated learning in work-related training and educational attainment: what we know and where we need to go.

              Researchers have been applying their knowledge of goal-oriented behavior to the self-regulated learning domain for more than 30 years. This review examines the current state of research on self-regulated learning and gaps in the field's understanding of how adults regulate their learning of work-related knowledge and skills. Self-regulation theory was used as a conceptual lens for deriving a heuristic framework of 16 fundamental constructs that constitute self-regulated learning. Meta-analytic findings (k=430, N=90,380) support theoretical propositions that self-regulation constructs are interrelated-30% of the corrected correlations among constructs were .50 or greater. Goal level, persistence, effort, and self-efficacy were the self-regulation constructs with the strongest effects on learning. Together these constructs accounted for 17% of the variance in learning, after controlling for cognitive ability and pretraining knowledge. However, 4 self-regulatory processes-planning, monitoring, help seeking, and emotion control-did not exhibit significant relationships with learning. Thus, a parsimonious framework of the self-regulated learning domain is presented that focuses on a subset of self-regulatory processes that have both limited overlap with other core processes and meaningful effects on learning. Research is needed to advance the field's understanding of how adults regulate their learning in an increasingly complex and knowledge-centric work environment. Such investigations should capture the dynamic nature of self-regulated learning, address the role of self-regulation in informal learning, and investigate how trainees regulate their transfer of training. © 2011 American Psychological Association
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Medical Education
                Med Educ
                Wiley-Blackwell
                03080110
                April 2015
                April 20 2015
                : 49
                : 4
                : 368-378
                Article
                10.1111/medu.12649
                25800297
                708a6600-6f7b-41ed-b5e0-71398d4051b6
                © 2015

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article