Loading…

Valid and reliable tools to measure safety of nursing students during simulated learning experiences: A scoping review

•There is no consensus on a standard tool to assess students’ safety in nursing simulation.•Studies in this scoping review did not conduct or report respective tools’ validity and reliability.•Studies should establish reliability and validity of developed tools or development of new tools. CINAHL Pl...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Teaching and learning in nursing 2023-04, Vol.18 (2), p.321-329
Main Authors: El Hussein, Mohamed Toufic, Hakkola, Jonah
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:•There is no consensus on a standard tool to assess students’ safety in nursing simulation.•Studies in this scoping review did not conduct or report respective tools’ validity and reliability.•Studies should establish reliability and validity of developed tools or development of new tools. CINAHL Plus, PubMed Central, Trip Database, and Google Scholar were used to conduct a scoping review to identify and map valid and reliable tools used to assess safety during nursing simulation experiences. Key factors in the selection process included: Safety assessment tools used in nursing simulation and tools that demonstrated validity and reliability. Twenty one studies were reviewed in full after the initial examination of the selection, and 11 made up the final sample. The safety assessment tools identified in this scoping review include: Quint Leveled Clinical Competency Tool, Clinical Simulation Competency Assessment Tool, Sweeney-Clark Simulation Evaluation Rubric and Creighton Competency Evaluation Instrument. There is a need for standardization of safety assessment tools in nursing simulation. Multiple studies reported use of assessment tools yet did not sufficiently conduct or report the respective validity and reliability. The tools recommended here require further validity and reliability testing.
ISSN:1557-3087
1557-2013
DOI:10.1016/j.teln.2022.12.009