Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

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.

Https

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.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Dec 28;7(1):42.
doi: 10.1186/s41077-022-00238-9.

Simulation-based summative assessment in healthcare: an overview of key principles for practice

Clément Buléon  1   2   3 , Laurent Mattatia  4 , Rebecca D Minehart  5   6   7 , Jenny W Rudolph  5   6   7 , Fernande J Lois  8 , Erwan Guillouet  9   10 , Anne-Laure Philippon  11 , Olivier Brissaud  12 , Antoine Lefevre-Scelles  13 , Dan Benhamou  14 , François Lecomte  15 , The SoFraSimS Assessment With Simulation Group, Anne Bellot, Isabelle Crublé, Guillaume Philippot, Thierry Vanderlinden, Sébastien Batrancourt, Claire Boithias-Guerot, Jean Bréaud, Philine de Vries, Louis Sibert, Thierry Sécheresse, Virginie Boulant, Louis Delamarre, Laurent Grillet, Marianne Jund, Christophe Mathurin, Jacques Berthod, Blaise Debien, Olivier Gacia, Guillaume Der Sahakian, Sylvain Boet, Denis Oriot, Jean-Michel Chabot
Affiliations

Simulation-based summative assessment in healthcare: an overview of key principles for practice

Clément Buléon et al. Adv Simul (Lond). .

Abstract

Background: Healthcare curricula need summative assessments relevant to and representative of clinical situations to best select and train learners. Simulation provides multiple benefits with a growing literature base proving its utility for training in a formative context. Advancing to the next step, "the use of simulation for summative assessment" requires rigorous and evidence-based development because any summative assessment is high stakes for participants, trainers, and programs. The first step of this process is to identify the baseline from which we can start.

Methods: First, using a modified nominal group technique, a task force of 34 panelists defined topics to clarify the why, how, what, when, and who for using simulation-based summative assessment (SBSA). Second, each topic was explored by a group of panelists based on state-of-the-art literature reviews technique with a snowball method to identify further references. Our goal was to identify current knowledge and potential recommendations for future directions. Results were cross-checked among groups and reviewed by an independent expert committee.

Results: Seven topics were selected by the task force: "What can be assessed in simulation?", "Assessment tools for SBSA", "Consequences of undergoing the SBSA process", "Scenarios for SBSA", "Debriefing, video, and research for SBSA", "Trainers for SBSA", and "Implementation of SBSA in healthcare". Together, these seven explorations provide an overview of what is known and can be done with relative certainty, and what is unknown and probably needs further investigation. Based on this work, we highlighted the trustworthiness of different summative assessment-related conclusions, the remaining important problems and questions, and their consequences for participants and institutions of how SBSA is conducted.

Conclusion: Our results identified among the seven topics one area with robust evidence in the literature ("What can be assessed in simulation?"), three areas with evidence that require guidance by expert opinion ("Assessment tools for SBSA", "Scenarios for SBSA", "Implementation of SBSA in healthcare"), and three areas with weak or emerging evidence ("Consequences of undergoing the SBSA process", "Debriefing for SBSA", "Trainers for SBSA"). Using SBSA holds much promise, with increasing demand for this application. Due to the important stakes involved, it must be rigorously conducted and supervised. Guidelines for good practice should be formalized to help with conduct and implementation. We believe this baseline can direct future investigation and the development of guidelines.

Keywords: Assessment; Competency-based education; Education; Medical education; Simulation; Summative.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study question and topic level of evidence
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Study flowchart
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. van der Vleuten CPM, Schuwirth LWT. Assessment in the context of problem-based learning. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2019;24:903–914. doi: 10.1007/s10459-019-09909-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boulet JR. Summative assessment in medicine: the promise of simulation for high-stakes evaluation. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15:1017–1024. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00228.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Green M, Tariq R, Green P. Improving patient safety through simulation training in anesthesiology: where are we? Anesthesiol Res Pract. 2016;2016:4237523. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Krage R, Erwteman M. State-of-the-art usage of simulation in anesthesia: skills and teamwork. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2015;28:727–734. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000257. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Askew K, Manthey DE, Potisek NM, Hu Y, Goforth J, McDonough K, et al. Practical application of assessment principles in the development of an innovative clinical performance evaluation in the entrustable professional activity era. Med Sci Educ. 2020;30:499–504. doi: 10.1007/s40670-019-00841-y. - DOI - PMC - PubMed