# data[].attributes.headline
Lecture atttendance and viewing on academic performance - Callum 18th Oct

# data[].attributes.subject
Lecture atttendance and viewing on academic performance - Callum 18th Oct

# data[].attributes.body
https://bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12909-020-02066-9

Feedback: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScpllrKfZAAVjsD2KsPw3GJvPTp8q3wtKjB0st4iBF5qhwbQw/viewform?usp=sf_link

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ultrasound-Guided Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf.PDF

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advances in Simulation 7, Article number: 8 (2022) Cite this article

8686 Accesses

9 Citations

31 Altmetric

Metrics

Abstract

The level of performance of every clinician and of the overall multiprofessional team relies on the skills and expertise they have individually and collectively acquired through education, training, self-directed learning, and reflection. Simulation-based education (SBE) is playing an increasingly important role in that respect, and it is sometimes said that it is an art to facilitate. Many explanations can justify this assertion. Although there is generally an emphasis on making everything as realistic or "high-fidelity" as possible, it is often futile and this is where the art of simulation comes into play with an element of modulation of realism linked to the intended learning objectives. The atmosphere created by the educators; how the learners are made to engage and interact; how physical, technical, and contextual elements are simulated or represented; and what type of technology is used need to be appropriately adapted to contribute to the immersiveness of any SBE activity. Although it inevitably carries a negative connotation, some form of "deception" is more commonly used than one may think for the benefit of learners during SBE. High levels of realism are sometimes achieved by making learners believe something works or reacts as would be expected in real life, whereas it is achieved in a totally different manner. Learners do not need to know, see, or understand these "tricks of the trade", shortcuts, or artistic or technological aspects, and this can be considered a form of benevolent deception. Similarly, information may be withheld to recreate a realistic situation and push learners to demonstrate specific learning outcomes, but it needs to be practised with caution and be justifiable. These forms of "positive" deception are part of most SBE activities and are used to help learners bridge the reality gap so they can suspend disbelief more easily, exercise critical thinking, and treat the simulation more realistically without damaging the trust they place in their educators. This article will discuss how aspects of SBE activities are often manipulated, modified, or hidden from learners to facilitate the learning experience and present a simulation fidelity model encompassing the environmental, patient, semantical, and phenomenal dimensions.

Introduction

Healthcare is a high-risk industry as providing patient care bears important responsibilities whereby people's lives are always at stake. Simulation, in its various forms, is increasingly used in all aspects of healthcare education and at all levels of a clinician's career [ 1]. Exposure to simulation-based education (SBE) generally starts during university undergraduate healthcare studies and now carries on in most places around the world through to postgraduate and postqualification education, and as part of continuing professional development. Similarly to the aviation industry for the ongoing recertification of airline pilots, this educational approach increasingly applies in some countries even for the most accomplished clinicians in their respective specialty to comply with recertification or revalidation requirements without putting patients at risk [ 2, 3]. Simulation is recognized as being able to provide a safe and relevant learning experience by working "ex vivo", meaning not using real patients. This article reflects the experience of the authors who have a combined 55 years of SBE experience in a variety of settings, simulation modalities, with different levels of learners and healthcare professions, but also work on the development of simulators [ 4, 5, 6].

Pre-briefings and briefings are conducted to prevent misunderstanding [ 11]. As some aspects of simulations, whether it is full-scale, screen-based, or virtual, are not always true to real-life from a physical (environment, equipment, and patient representation), semantical, or phenomenal point of view, learners need to be informed regarding the limitations of these various elements [ 12, 13, 14, 15] and of their expected behaviour and actions during SBE activities. The pre-briefing at the start of a session is when a fiction contract should be presented to learners as a ground rule whereby they need to consent to appropriately engage in the activity, be respectful, and maintain confidentiality [ 12]. For some SBE activities, educators should emphasize that learners should adopt a professional attitude (a phenomenal aspect) and suspend disbelief [ 16, 17], especially for aspects where the level of fidelity of the simulation is lower than expected. In our experience, most learners may otherwise solely interpret the fiction contract expectation as applying to the "hands-on" aspect of the technical skills used during clinical procedures as opposed to also incorporating other aspects such as professional conduct, behaviour, and communication with the other team members (learners or confederates), the patient(s) (simulated or simulator), and other simulated participants (relatives, bystanders, etc.) if applicable. Then comes the briefing usually provided for a subset activity within a simulation session (e.g. before a scenario or before practising a new procedure) whereby providing a context contributes to getting the learners to relate the simulation activity as a real clinical encounter. Depending on the type and purpose of the SBE activity, there may be limitations to the information that can be provided during this phase so as not to reveal the content of the scenario or on what aspects the learners will really be challenged with in terms of the precise learning outcomes they will need to demonstrate [ 18]. For a scenario-based activity, the well-intended concealment of such information enables learners to experience the simulation in a more realistic manner as opposed to them already knowing what is going to happen and pre-empting how it needs to be dealt with. This aspect of withholding information can be seen as a form of deception and can be justified in terms of learning benefits [ 19]. It is an ethical and well-founded strategy adopted without malicious intention on the basis that learners have previously been briefed that the simulation would mimic a real situation (including the occurrence of unexpected events), and they consented to take part in the activity. There are situations, however, based on learners' level of experience and the purpose of the simulation session, when detailed scenario learning goals and contents are not withheld and learners are openly prescribed during a scenario briefing to perform certain actions (e.g. "In this scenario, implement the SBAR (Situation/Background/Assessment/Recommendation) communication tool when your colleague arrives to see the patient").

The goal of this debate article is to present a different perspective using a simulation fidelity model with four elements illustrating the gap with reality and an aspect of deception which inherently exists in almost all SBE activities.

Definition of deception in simulation

Origins of deception

Deception generally refers to the act of concealing information or misinforming others to mislead them [ 27], but in the SBE context, it is often related to the existence of ex-reality gaps. This may cause learners to emerge from the simulation with a negative feeling of deception that may be more or less well founded. Three main reasons can be identified:

It may be due to a misunderstanding of the educational model and its context because of a perceived insufficient pre-briefing or preparation of the learners for the activity, which can be intentional or unintentional.

It could be related to the discovery of an unexpected content aspect during an activity such as an altered piece of equipment or a confederate triggering an event or a reaction from the scenario participants, or the acute and unrealistic deterioration of the patient's condition.

Finally, it could be caused by the absence of immediate consent between the learners and the educator(s) for being immersed in the learning process, for example, in the case of an in situ unannounced simulation exercise or simulated patient (SP) encounter designed on purpose to surprise learners within their working environment [ 28, 29].

Although "deception" has generally a negative connotation, in the SBE context for a subset of scenarios, the concealment or alteration of information or equipment is primarily used by educators to not reveal the precise scenario objectives [ 19]. It may also be used to "make learners believe" by enabling them to make some assumptions regarding aspects of the simulation so they can more naturally suspend disbelief while engaging in the activity. The use of deception for the benefit of the learners' development is part of the art of simulation and has been referred to as "benevolent deception" [ 30]. Some form of deception due to information being concealed from learners by the educators during the simulation activity pre-briefing is generally intentional and justifiable, especially if it pushes learners to exercise critical thinking during the activity [ 18].

Types of deceptions

Make learners believe

Simulation educators are aware of the limits of the entities used to represent the patient and its environment. Together, these elements form the "simulation model". Nevertheless, simulation educators often attempt to reach a high level of realism to help learners suspend disbelief. Most of the technical "make believe" elements of the simulation model do not need to be divulged to learners as it would not benefit their learning experience and it bears no ethical concerns. Learners are simply left to form their own assumptions to bridge the simulation-reality gap. For example, the "real" physical, physiological, or pharmacological processes portrayed by the "patient" throughout a scenario might be discussed during the debriefing whereas how it was technically controlled and simulated will not be revealed as it does not matter.

Transparency

SBE generally tries to reproduce a realistic situation whereby learners are not informed in advance of the future development of a situation that can impact how the team functions, unless the intended learning objectives are focused on learners demonstrating specific skills (i.e. "Shows how" of Miller's pyramid) [ 10]. During the pre-briefing, educators aim to explain the process of the simulation session from an educational point of view; however, some specific elements are generally not disclosed. Complete disclosure of the functioning of the model, which includes all the steps within an SBE activity such as findings during an intervention on a surgical simulator, interactions between simulated participants/patients/relatives or with supplemental team members (i.e. confederates), and the facilitators generally orchestrating everything from a control room, would represent transparency. However, revealing the full contents of an SBE activity for the sake of transparency may have limited educational value as it will influence the learners' decisions and actions.

Lack of learner engagement and perceived realism

A lack of perceived realism sometimes makes it difficult for learners to immerse themselves and react as if they were dealing with a real situation. This difficulty in suspending disbelief may be triggered by a number of elements related to the "simulation model", the ex-reality, or by the learners themselves due to their attitude [ 16], level of experience, or preferred learning style. To promote a positive learning engagement, learners need to accept the simulation model as an experiential learning modality despite its limitations, which can be addressed during the pre-briefing or orientation phase [ 11]. A positive attitude is key to the learners' engagement and them achieving the SBE activities' educational objectives.

Ethics of deception

Deception is sometimes used in an ethical manner in low-risk research settings [ 31], and so can it in an educational context.

We propose that a degree of deception in SBE is generally ethically appropriate because:

1. 1.
It is underpinned by the fiction contract and the learners' consent about SBE placing them in a realistic situation.

2. 2.
The ultimate goal is beneficence, as learners will learn from the experience and improve their performance in future similar unexpected situations and as long as it is done while ensuring their psychological safety.

3. 3.
The use of good-judgement debriefing will make debriefing benevolent, non-offensive, and pertinent to provide a discursive analysis of the situation preventing learners from still potentially feeling deceived after the simulation, but instead make them understand and accept the reason for any form of deception [ 32].

Determinants of deception

Several factors will determine the level and form of deception that may need to be used.

Learners' level of experience

Although more experienced learners generally perform better when there is a higher level of realism [ 37], they may have the best ability to suspend disbelief and bridge fidelity gaps caused by the limitations of the simulation process or technology. It could hence be argued that it is the least experienced learners who require the highest level of realism, as it is on the basis of the activity that they will develop their competencies or form their "primary frames" [ 12]. Again this needs to be adjusted according to the learning objectives and the learners' level of experience [ 36], as making the simulation too realistic could overwhelm their senses and defeat all educational intents [ 38]. It is recommended that for SBE to be effective, only essential aspects in the "circle of focus" need to replicate reality [ 39]. The "circle of focus" refers to key aspects, mostly physical, on which learners will need to be concentrating to be fully immersed in the activity. A higher level of realism is often required for these aspects especially if learners have limited experience and they are of high significance to the learning outcomes, such as the recognition of certain pathologies or the practice of a precise surgical procedure. When things are not quite as in the real world, whether it is in appearance, feel, complexity, or from a time, team interaction, or logistical aspect, learners should be informed so their future expectations of real-life similar situations can be managed accordingly. This will contribute to them not feeling deceived by the learning experience upon which their confidence and skills will be built [ 7]. The adequate adjustment of the above elements and the level of transparency of the information provided or concealed can promote the transference of learning from the simulation context to real clinical practice. It can be said that the SBE opportunities facilitated by educators for learners include multidimensional aspects of validity and reliability, directly linked to the key aspects of "realism" or "fidelity".

Relation of fidelity to validity and reliability of what educators recreate for learners

Validity

As much of what happens in simulation relies on a staged initial situation which needs to be carefully considered to help learners suspend disbelief [ 16, 18]. Content and face validity are important concepts that can influence learners' decision-making processes and interventions during SBE activities. For example, cues lead learners to making a diagnosis of the patient or situation and take appropriate corrective actions [ 40]. To ensure learners benefit from a high-quality educational experience with valid scenarios, key steps with expert input need to be followed [ 18, 33, 40]. How scenarios are eventually facilitated to promote the learner's immersion into the activity is more or less dependent on their number, level of experience, and the technology used. If the environment, scenario, patient representation, and learners' involvement are highly realistic because it is adapted to their level of experience, the atmosphere for a highly immersive simulation experience can be achieved. Moreover, these requirements commonly associated with the notion of "high-fidelity" sometimes seem mandatory to get the highest performance from experts [ 37] (who yet have the best ability to fill fidelity gaps), but not from beginners or novice learners, for whom it is said that a less "intense" or lower fidelity usually makes it better [ 41].

Reliability

Similarly, reliability is another important aspect as it may be necessary to expose successive groups or individual learners to a very similar learning experience (but not necessarily exactly to the same scenario as the same learning goals can often be achieved in different ways for different learners) to ensure they have an equal opportunity to gain knowledge and skills and demonstrate specific learning outcomes or for the fairness of high-stake examinations. This relies on the consistent use of a particular approach, technology, detailed scripting of key scenario aspects and set up, level of difficulty, and interventions from simulated participants (e.g. confederates, SP, relatives) [ 42]. The variability in learners' potential decisions and actions to a specific situation always needs to be pre-empted through corrective interventions [ 43]. This needs to be combined with the careful and detailed scripting and piloting of scenarios to enhance their reliability [ 18].

Dividing simulation fidelity into 4 elements

Therefore, this different perspective on the concept of simulation fidelity proposes a model applicable to each simulation-based activity with four key elements which are the environmental, patient, semantical, and phenomenal dimensions. Each can have its own level of actual fidelity and can be supplemented by some level of deception, and the total sum of which constitutes the SBE activity (Fig. 1).

Representation of the simulation fidelity elements with their respective degree of realism and potential deception

Presentation of the model and its elements

The proposed model highlights the multifaceted aspect of SBE and is meant to help educators realize the importance of each element in relation to the activity's intended learning objectives. Both the pre-briefing and debriefing that surround the SBE activity are directly affected by the choices made in designing it in terms of bridging the fidelity gaps as required and ensuring the expected transfer of learning to real clinical practice. The higher the level of fidelity and deception for any of the elements, the closer to reality is the simulation. Figure 1 illustrates with its arrows that a different level of fidelity or deception can be used in any of the elements to reach the required level of realism and meet the intended learning objectives.

The environmental element

This element deals with the facility and equipment used during the simulation. It is one of the aspects of physical realism [ 12].

The training venue

Patient care occurs in a variety of settings, all of which cannot necessarily be exactly reproduced for training purposes due to logistical, safety, or financial constraints (e.g. a busy highway, a collapsed building, a flying helicopter...). This is an aspect of "ex-reality" that learners and educators sometimes have to accept. In some situations, when a gap between the simulation setting and the real clinical world would be too detrimental to the learning objectives, the activity may have to take place in situ, providing a high level of environmental realism. Important aspects of the real setting may be linked to the presence of unique pieces of equipment or the size or configuration of the space [ 47]. However, if some of these aspects are only peripheral to the learning experience, equipment or other cues can be replaced by pop-up banners (e.g. motorway traffic, construction site, collapsed building...) or audio recordings of the real setting can be used as background noise (e.g. fire alarm in a building, traffic noise of passing vehicles...) to help learners immerse themselves into the simulated environment [ 48].

Manipulating elements of the environment

Many important lessons can be learnt from system or technical failures due to an unfortunate alignment of circumstances [ 49]. With appropriate planning, such situations can be recreated for learners to benefit from such experiences [ 50]. It relies on an element of deception as learners should only be briefed on what they need to know, as was the case at the time of the real incident. It may rely on the particular positioning or intentional alteration of a piece of equipment or furniture around the room or being able to cause an equipment malfunction during a patient care episode for the team to demonstrate troubleshooting skills. The latter may require some more or less sophisticated technical manipulation of the device involved so the fault can be remotely triggered by the simulation team when required.

The patient element

This element deals with the patient or part of a patient's good or poor representation, the modality adopted (e.g. a full-body patient simulator or an organ on a virtual reality (VR) surgical simulator). It is also an aspect of physical realism [ 12]. Deception may occur unintentionally due to technological limitations (a mannequin with disproportionate physical features, a part-task trainer not rendering the appropriate feeling when performing a procedure on it, a VR simulator not providing the correct haptic feedback, or making a task more difficult or easier than it is normally), or on the contrary, it may be intentional for the safeguard of SPs using physical adjuncts to provide important diagnostic or visual cues or with the patient adhering to a script prompting them to lie or hide key information until adequately explored by learners. It is done in a benevolent manner to challenge learners and help them gain experience. Another aspect relates to educators controlling the simulator's response to treatment provided by learners which is not automatically triggered and hence may be subjective. Deception can help bridge the reality gap so the learners can suspend disbelief more easily and treat the patient more realistically [ 16].

Emulating data

Simulating mechanical, visual, or physical features and cues

Many aspects of patient simulators function in a totally different manner than on human beings. Despite continuous technological advances, most high technology patient simulators' features deceive learners in making them believe they are observing cues that function in the same way as on human beings. One could consider it as persistent-although decreasing with technological developments-lack in face validity. Patient simulators often have central or peripheral pulses synchronized with their heart sounds and a strength proportional with the programmed blood pressure. Learners are led to believe that the patient simulator has some form of a circulatory system similar to a real human being. This feature might be achieved using a solenoid moving up and down because of modulated current impulses synchronized with the heart sound which is an audio sound corresponding to the selected heart condition and electrocardiogram rhythm played through one or more small speakers placed inside the mannequin's torso. A common limitation for heart, lungs, and bowel sounds is that the auscultation sounds can only be heard clearly when the stethoscope is placed over very specific locations (i.e. on the speakers) on the patient simulator, which is not a true representation of what would be experienced on a human being.

If we now consider the appearance or visual aspects of a patient simulator, it can be technically challenging to realistically simulate a progressive cyanosis or hypoxemia. It is usually achieved by lighting up blue light-emitting diodes inside its skin, giving the impression it has blue lipstick or skin marks. This cue is meant to be interpreted by learners as cyanosis, but it does not reflect "real cyanosis" that can be mild or intense, covering all the teguments or only part of them like lips or fingers and toes. Confusion can be created among learners, because cyanosis due to circulatory causes should be present more distally than simply on the lips. Such cue may sometimes be taken with a touch of humour if the learners have not been made aware of such feature during the patient simulator familiarization period. Considering an extracorporeal life support (ECLS) scenario, it is difficult to realistically and safely simulate the colour difference between oxygenated and deoxygenated blood without using real blood. The thermochromic properties of a special fluid can be used to make learners believe that the colour change is achieved via actual oxygenation of the "blood" [ 55]. The benevolent deception is that learners will never need to know otherwise as this can be considered a "trick of the trade". Many other aspects of ECLS simulation are also purposefully deceiving learners and it might be achieved in a more or less concealed manner but it should ultimately aim to minimize the risk of confusion or negative learning [ 56]. Poor simulation fidelity may adversely affect real clinical practice if learners become accustomed to react to unrealistic cues or to perpetually ignore visible unconventional circuit alterations [ 10, 56, 57, 58]. In such situations, transparency of the deception as a simulation limitation is required. Developing some form of automaticity based on the recognition of cues that act as behavioural triggers can be an important part of learning, but these cues need to be valid to ensure adequate skills and knowledge transference to real patient care. The latter point is especially important as memory retrieval and pattern recognition with learners' educational experience eventually play an important role in their decision-making and action initiation in clinical practice [ 59].

The semantical element

This element relates to the SBE activity with reference to all aspects of clinical reality [ 12]. Deception may be used in different ways for the learning objectives to be addressed by intentionally filling in or creating fidelity gaps based on the pre-briefing or briefing information provided by the educators. It may also be achieved based on how the simulator or simulated participant(s) make the simulation evolve in response to the learners' actions or to force them to take some form of action, how slowly or fast the situation evolves, but also in relation to allowing or not the patient to die during a scenario. Such elements of deception with an intent to address aspects of human factors need to eventually be revealed to learners during the debriefing so they can understand why it was done and its relevance to the learning experience [ 27, 31].

Revealing the educators' intention to the learners

Interventions from confederates and other simulated participants or patients

These actions can lead to a strong feeling of having been tricked and a moral suffering linked to the Milgram effect can appear [ 64]. Such interventions involving confederates can set the scene for a difficult debriefing if not presented adequately during the simulation session pre-briefing in the realm of situational awareness, teamwork, leadership, followership, and communication. Deception in the form of an acted role can be associated with some feeling of anger from the learners during the debriefing reaction phase against the authoritative person embodying hierarchy in the scenario. Discussing these aspects by exploring what happened is especially important when learners had difficulties resolving a situation purposefully caused by a hierarchical tension. It will help explain the behaviour and actions of the confederate in making specific learning objectives emerge. At the very latest, if the aspect of deception does not emerge during the debriefing reaction phase, it should be discussed during the analytical phase [ 13] in a very tactful manner to ensure their psychological safety [ 62, 65], justifying the approach used so the educators remain trusted by the learners and so they maintain faith in the educational technique adopted. It is hence strongly advised that educators receive some formal training in relation to SBE and debriefing [ 20, 62].

Time modulation

Another aspect to consider in relation to learner deception concerns the purposeful flexibility of time during simulation activities, whereby the patient deterioration or recovery phase can be slowed down or accelerated to make it easier for learners in order not to damage their confidence or to save time. This can be described as a "modulation" feature [ 12]. This technique may be used to avoid ending the scenario on a negative note or to speed up the effect of a drug or other intervention. When this technique is used, it should be discussed with learners during the debriefing so their expectation can be managed when it comes to future similar real-life situations. Another potential situation when learners may feel deceived can occur when there is no or minimal recovery of the patient despite their numerous appropriate actions. Learners may feel they are being tricked or teased by the simulation team controlling the scenario [ 66]. Their feelings should be explored during the debriefing so the rationale for such action can be explained.

Allowing scenarios to end on a negative note or not

The phenomenal element

Examples

Example 1

Let us consider the following scenario-based simulation activity as an example:

In situ intensive care setting (high environmental fidelity) with mostly real clinical equipment and some realistically emulated with remotely controlled parameters able to provide a very realistic perception of the situation (moderate level of deception)

With an interactive computer-controlled patient simulator (moderate level of patient fidelity due to feel and look clearly distinctive from a real human being) on ECLS with a thermochromic fluid simulating the appropriate access and return blood colour change (high level of deception)

A clinical presentation which suddenly changes due to the scripted action of a confederate pulling out the return cannulae (high level of deception, as done in a potentially realistic manner), but a very conservative and slow deterioration of the patient condition (low to moderate level of semantical fidelity) to enable learners to control the situation

Involves a team of new ECLS clinicians who are guided step by step by an instructor in their management of the situation (low phenomenal fidelity, no deception)

The tabular representation of this SBE activity is shown in Fig. 2. It depicts an overall realistic situation but does not fully immerse the participants due to the way it is facilitated with guidance from an instructor and slowed down from a time and patient deterioration perspective. It can be an appropriate approach to use if the learning objective is to illustrate and explain step by step the role and actions expected of each team member. Doing this activity in situ is also a key element as participants learn to work with the resources at hand in that clinical setting which can be limited in space but where additional help might be readily available if an emergency situation arises. In this case, debriefing should take into account the expected high level of benevolent deception due to the phenomenal element making the simulation quite unrealistic from the learners' engagement perspective.

Tabular representation of the presented hypothetical ECLS in situ simulation-based activity

Example 2

Let us consider this other situation represented in Fig. 3.

The scenario is enacted outdoor in a quiet car park which learners need to consider as a rural road where a road traffic collision took place between a car and a fixed object (moderate level of environmental fidelity as although the area is covered with tarmac, the configuration of the space and lack of traffic do not represent the expected setting) and all the equipment at their disposal is real except for a stethoscope that unknowingly to them plays remotely selectable auscultation sounds (moderate level of deception as learners will know they are using a special stethoscope) [ 74].

Make-up has been professionally applied to the chest of a trained SP to show mild signs of contusion and a bleeding nose (high level of patient fidelity), and the patient will discreetly control the sounds of basal crackles played by the stethoscope upon auscultation (moderate level of deception).

The patient is haemodynamically stable and all physiological parameters remain normal (high level of semantical fidelity), but what is displayed on the patient monitor are actually emulated physiological parameters remotely controlled by the facilitator (moderate level of deception as learners will know the data is not coming from the SP).

The learners are an experienced team of paramedics who are aware they are about to take part in an immersive scenario-based simulation activity without any guidance (high phenomenal fidelity, no deception).

Tabular representation of a pre-hospital simulation-based activity example

This example presents a different profile of fidelity in the different elements which can be justified for several reasons: The physical assessment and extrication of a real human being from a vehicle is more realistic than when a mannequin is used, from a physical, communication, and emotional point of view; however, it requires a different type of preparation in terms of moulaging. In addition, the SP needs to learn and understand their script to act appropriately. It may involve the use of an earpiece so they can receive updated acting instructions from the scenario director. The selection of a slightly different environment can be made for practical reasons without too much affecting the learning experience as long as learners are clearly briefed about which environment they should consider being working in and take the corresponding safety measures. In this case, if deception occurs, it is unintentional, as it is related to the ex vivo and/or ex-reality environmental misunderstanding and not to a particular educational objective.

Considering a different context and approach, the examples presented illustrate that the levels of fidelity and their corresponding potential degree of deception can be modulated and vary greatly between SBE activities. This can be done in order to address different learning objectives and focus on the degree of realism where it is required rather than everywhere, which could be distractive or an inefficient use of resources or time.

Conclusion

SBE is often used for learners to become more proficient in handling real-life situations. For this reason, some level of realism is required to ensure appropriate assimilation of skills and knowledge and transference of learning to real clinical practice. Some form of learner deception is often used on purpose in SBE to help recreate representations of expected real-life features with the required degree of fidelity, but it needs to be used with beneficence and caution in order not to confuse, misguide, or even offend learners. For simulation to remain a well-perceived educational approach, it is sometimes necessary to discuss with learners the rationale for the use of benevolent deception as a means to achieving specific learning objectives. It means that deception can have a positive value for educating healthcare learners and providers. Nevertheless, in such cases, the possibility of deception should be presented during the pre-briefing. Furthermore, any learner's reaction to deception should be discussed and its reasons should be clearly explained during the debriefing phase to re-establish or maintain the trust placed by learners in SBE and the educators. We presented a model to help educators understand the various elements where fidelity and deception can be adjusted according to the educational requirements of the learners and the type of activity and learning objectives that are being addressed.

Availability of data and materials

Abbreviations

ECMO:

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

ECLS:

Extracorporeal life support

SBE:

Simulation-based education

SP:

Simulated patient

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Hamad Medical Corporation Ambulance Service, Medical City, Doha, Qatar

Guillaume Alinier

2. School of Allied Health Professions, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, UK

Guillaume Alinier

3. Weill Cornell Medicine - Qatar, Education City, Doha, Qatar

Guillaume Alinier

4. Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

Guillaume Alinier

5. Paediatric Emergency Department, University Hospital of Poitiers, Poitiers, France

Denis Oriot

6. ABS Lab, Simulation Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, University of Poitiers, Poitiers, France

Denis Oriot

Contributions

GA initiated the article's concept, wrote the initial draft, and created the figures. DO contributed to the article. The authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors' information

GA graduated with a Masters in Applied Physics, Postgraduate Certificate in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, and a PhD in simulation in healthcare education. He has been involved in simulation-based undergraduate and postgraduate education for over two decades with a broad range of healthcare professions and clinical specialties. He is an active and long-standing member of several simulation societies (SSH, SESAM, and ASPiH) with an interest in accreditation, certification, standards, design, technology, and terminology. He has co-authored books with DO on debriefing (Springer and Elsevier) that emphasize the importance of learner briefing and orientation to the simulation process and environment.

DO studied in France and Canada (McGill University). He obtained a Masters in Neurosciences, a Medical Doctorate with a specialization in Paediatrics, and a PhD in Ethics. He learnt simulation in the early 1990s in McGill and since then developed several educational simulation programmes dealing with paediatrics, neonatology, and difficult communications. He is a member of SSH and IPSSW and has a special interest in the assessment of performance in simulation, stress and performance, and debriefing. He co-authored with GA the Pocket book for simulation debriefing in healthcare.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guillaume Alinier.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Alinier, G., Oriot, D. Simulation-based education: deceiving learners with good intent. Adv Simul 7, 8 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-022-00206-3
Download citation
Keywords

Benevolent deception

Fidelity

Realism

Trick

Make believe

Disbelief

Technology

Simulation

Debriefing

Information modification

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Simulation-based education: deceiving learners with good intent - Advances in Simulation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The level of performance of every clinician and of the overall multiprofessional team relies on the skills and expertise they have individually and collectively acquired through education, training, self-directed learning, and reflection. Simulation-based education (SBE) is playing an increasingly important role in that respect, and it is sometimes said that it is an art to facilitate.

# data[].attributes.body
https://bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12909-023-04589-3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Large Language Models in Medical Education Opportunities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The .gov means it's official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Abstract

Background: Since 2017, more than 50% of UK doctors have undertaken a 'Foundation 3 (F3) Year' training break after completing their foundation programme (the first two years following graduation), rather than immediately enter specialty training. The reasons for, and consequences of, the growing F3 trend are largely unknown. This scoping review presents the current evidence and identifies future research in this field.

Methods: Following Arksey and O'Malley's guidelines, 12 databases and three UK-based national postgraduate organisation websites were searched for articles published in English (final searches January 2020). Multiple search terms were used to capture articles relating to the 'F3' time-period, including 'post-foundation' or 'pre-specialty' training. Title, abstract and full-paper screening selected articles reporting any aspect of F3, including within a wider context (eg postgraduate training breaks), and then underwent mixed-methods analysis.

Results: Of 4766 articles identified, 45 were included. All articles were published after 2009; 14/45 (31.1%) were published in 2019. 27 articles reported research, and the remainder were opinion/commentaries. Specific personal (including demographic), professional and organisational factors, particularly the UK postgraduate training structure, are associated with undertaking an F3. The majority of F3 training breaks last 1 year and involve working (clinically or non-clinically) and/or travel. The decision to undertake an F3 is made either prior to or during foundation training. Evidence regarding the impact of F3 on health care service provision was limited but evenly balanced.

Conclusions: In summarising the existing F3 evidence, this review has highlighted important issues including health care workforce equality and diversity, training pathway inflexibility and the effect of negative early-career experiences on subsequent career decisions. More research is needed to understand the financial impact of training breaks on health care service provision, how training programmes must adapt to retain more trainees and the long-term effects of training breaks, such as F3, on subsequent career progression.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.

Osborne SR, Alston LV, Bolton KA, Whelan J, Reeve E, Wong Shee A, Browne J, Walker T, Versace VL, Allender S, Nichols M, Backholer K, Goodwin N, Lewis S, Dalton H, Prael G, Curtin M, Brooks R, Verdon S, Crockett J, Hodgins G, Walsh S, Lyle DM, Thompson SC, Browne LJ, Knight S, Pit SW, Jones M, Gillam MH, Leach MJ, Gonzalez-Chica DA, Muyambi K, Eshetie T, Tran K, May E, Lieschke G, Parker V, Smith A, Hayes C, Dunlop AJ, Rajappa H, White R, Oakley P, Holliday S. Osborne SR, et al. Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881. Med J Aust. 2020. PMID: 33314144

Policies and strategies to retain and support the return of experienced GPs in direct patient care: the ReGROUP mixed-methods study.

Campbell JL, Fletcher E, Abel G, Anderson R, Chilvers R, Dean SG, Richards SH, Sansom A, Terry R, Aylward A, Fitzner G, Gomez-Cano M, Long L, Mustafee N, Robinson S, Smart PA, Warren FC, Welsman J, Salisbury C. Campbell JL, et al. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2019 Apr. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2019 Apr. PMID: 30973692 Free Books & Documents. Review.

References

REFERENCES

Department of Health. Modernising Medical Careers-The Next Steps: The Future Shape of Foundation, Specialist and General Practice Training Programmes. Department of Health; 2004.

Fuller G, Simpson IA. "Modernising Medical Careers" to "Shape of Training"-how soon we forget. BMJ. 2014;348:g2865.

Delamothe T. Modernising Medical Careers laid bare. BMJ. 2007;335(7623):733.

Tooke J. Aspiring to Excellence. Findings and Final Recommendations of the Independent Inquiry into Modernising Medical Careers. London: MMC Inquiry; 2008.

Delamothe T. Modernising Medical Careers: final report. BMJ. 2008;336(7635):54-55.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
national center for biotechnology information

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The F3 phenomenon: Early-career training breaks in medical training. A scoping review - PubMed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In summarising the existing F3 evidence, this review has highlighted important issues including health care workforce equality and diversity, training pathway inflexibility and the effect of negative early-career experiences on subsequent career decisions. More research is needed to understand the f ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Artificial intelligence in medical education: a cross-sectional needs assessment - BMC Medical Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Background As the information age wanes, enabling the prevalence of the artificial intelligence age; expectations, responsibilities, and job definitions need to be redefined for those who provide services in healthcare. This study examined the perceptions of future physicians on the possible influences of artificial intelligence on medicine, and to determine the needs that might be helpful for curriculum restructuring.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
A call for spaced repetition in medical education

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Equipping medical students for ward round learning - The Clinical Teacher

# data[].attributes.body
https://asmepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tct.13500

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Researching the application of virtual reality in medical education: one-year follow-up of a randomized trial - BMC Medical Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Background Compared with traditional tendon repair teaching methods, using a virtual reality (VR) simulator to teach tendon suturing can significantly improve medical students’ exercise time, operation flow and operation knowledge. At present, the purpose of this study is to explore the long-term in…

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Using virtual reality simulation environments to assess competence for Emergency Medicine learners.

# data[].attributes.body
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/share/9YTUQ87S3K7MYTJZQJF7?target=10.1111/acem.13308

# data[].attributes.body
Effectiveness of problem-based learning methodology in undergraduate medical education: a scoping review - PMC (nih.gov)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Effectiveness of problem-based learning methodology in undergraduate medical education: a scoping review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Problem-based learning (PBL) is a pedagogical approach that shifts the role of the teacher to the student (student-centered) and is based on self-directed learning. Although PBL has been adopted in undergraduate and postgraduate medical education, the…

# data[].attributes.body
This paper is on the Day 1 Learning Materials, but I thought I'd load it here - since it remains a Hot Topic (for this module anyway!)