Simulation design - peer-to-peer training as preparation for full-scale scenarios.

OBJECTIVES: Design of simulation training can have important implications for learning outcomes. This paper describes a pilot simulation training program for baccalaureate nursing students that includes intensive preparations, peer-to-peer skills training (P2P), prior to full-scale scenario training. METHODS: A quality improvement analysis of a large scale experimental, mixed methods study. The project describes the design, analysis, and potential effects of a simulation education program containing P2P for third year nursing students (163 in treatment; 148 in control, n=311). RESULTS: The intervention group was found to be significantly more confident in both technical and non-technical nursing skills. Results suggest that the addition of P2P training may have a direct positive impact and increase the impact on full-scale simulations and debriefing. CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced focus on preparation activities prior to full-scale scenarios, including the use of P2P training methods are advocated.

Simulation training and professional self-confidence: A large-scale study of third year nursing students.

BACKGROUND: While hands-on training is a prerequisite for successful education of nursing students, constraints on clinical training availability and quality have increased focus on effects of in-school simulation training. However, existing research has produced inconsistent conclusions and the literature lacks high-powered evidence from controlled trials. OBJECTIVES: To test effects of a simulation scheme on student professional self-confidence in technical and non-technical skills, as well as to investigate effects on knowledge acquisition and interaction with clinical training. DESIGN: Field experiment, treatment is a three + two day simulation training scheme while control is a standard three hour simulation session. Self-confidence in a list of technical and non-technical skills is measured in three survey-rounds. Enriched with data on type of clinical training site and grade attainment. SETTING: University College Copenhagen Department of Nursing, all third year students in 2019. PARTICIPANTS: 352 in cohort, out of which 316 participated and 311 answered first survey round (163 in treatment, 148 in control). METHODS: Field experiment analyzed utilizing multivariate OLS regression analysis. RESULTS: Students who receive increased simulation training report markedly higher levels of professional self-confidence immediately after training. This effect is double the size for confidence in technical skills, compared to non-technical skills. The effects on self-confidence in technical skills persist at the end of the following semester for those that receive low intensity clinical training. Students who receive the treatment see a small (and statistically uncertain) relative increase in grade attainment in the semester of treatment, but this difference dissipates over time. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation training has substantial positive short-term effects for the professional self-confidence of nursing students and appears to have small positive effects on knowledge acquisition. Most of these effects are crowded out by other factors (notably intensive clinical training) over time but might have long-term positive effects for those that do not receive other intensive hands-on experiences. This is interpreted as an indication that simulation training can be used to compensate for uncertainties in providing sufficient training experiences outside of academic training.

Making gender diversity work for scientific discovery and innovation.

Gender diversity has the potential to drive scientific discovery and innovation. Here, we distinguish three approaches to gender diversity: diversity in research teams, diversity in research methods and diversity in research questions. While gender diversity is commonly understood to refer only to the gender composition of research teams, fully realizing the potential of diversity for science and innovation also requires attention to the methods employed and questions raised in scientific knowledge-making. We provide a framework for understanding the best ways to support the three approaches to gender diversity across four interdependent domains - from research teams to the broader disciplines in which they are embedded to research organizations and ultimately to the different societies that shape them through specific gender norms and policies. Our analysis demonstrates that realizing the benefits of diversity for science requires careful management of these four interdependent domains.

Size, Accumulation and Performance for Research Grants: Examining the Role of Size for Centres of Excellence.

The present paper examines the relation between size, accumulation and performance for research grants, where we examine the relation between grant size for Centres of Excellence (CoE) funded by the Danish National Research Foundation (DNRF) and various ex post research performance measures, including impact and shares of highly cited articles. We examine both the relation between size and performance and also how performance for CoEs evolves over the course of grant periods. In terms of dynamics, it appears that performance over the grant period (i.e. 10 years) is falling for the largest CoEs, while it is increasing for those among the smallest half. Overall, multivariate econometric analysis finds evidence that performance is increasing in grant size and over time. In both cases, the relation appears to be non-linear, suggesting that there is a point at which performance peaks. The CoEs have also been very successful in securing additional funding, which can be viewed as a 'cumulative effect' of center grants. In terms of new personnel, the far majority of additional funding is spent on early career researchers, hence, this accumulation would appear to have a 'generational' dimension, allowing for scientific expertise to be passed on to an increasing number of younger researchers.

Developing a methodology to assess the impact of research grant funding: a mixed methods approach.

This paper discusses the development of a mixed methods approach to analyse research funding. Research policy has taken on an increasingly prominent role in the broader political scene, where research is seen as a critical factor in maintaining and improving growth, welfare and international competitiveness. This has motivated growing emphasis on the impacts of science funding, and how funding can best be designed to promote socio-economic progress. Meeting these demands for impact assessment involves a number of complex issues that are difficult to fully address in a single study or in the design of a single methodology. However, they point to some general principles that can be explored in methodological design. We draw on a recent evaluation of the impacts of research grant funding, discussing both key issues in developing a methodology for the analysis and subsequent results. The case of research grant funding, involving a complex mix of direct and intermediate effects that contribute to the overall impact of funding on research performance, illustrates the value of a mixed methods approach to provide a more robust and complete analysis of policy impacts. Reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology are used to examine refinements for future work.