Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Simulation-Based Teaching versus Traditional Instruction in Medicine: A Pilot Study among Clinical Medical Students

  • 637 Accesses

  • 49 Citations


Objective: To compare simulator-based teaching with traditional instruction among clinical medical students. Methods: Randomized controlled trial with written pre-post testing. Third-year medical students (n = 38) received either a myocardial infarction (MI) simulation followed by a reactive airways disease (RAD) lecture, or a RAD simulation followed by an MI lecture. Results: Mean pre-post test score improvement was seen across teaching modalities (overall change score [simulation] = 8.8 [95% CI = 2.3–15.3], pretest [62.7]; change score [lecture] = 11.3 [95% CI = 5.7–16.9], pretest [59.7]). However, no significant differences were observed between simulator-based teaching and lecture, in either subject domain. Conclusions: After a single instructional session for clinical medical students, differences between simulator-based teaching and lecture could not be established by the written test protocols used in this pilot. Future studies should consider the effects of iterative exposure assessed by clinical performance measures across multiple centers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Dewey, J. [1916](1994). Thinking in education. Reprinted in: L.B. Barnes, C.R. Christensen & A.J. Hansen (eds),Teaching and the Case Method, 3rd ed. (pp. 9–14). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

  2. M.J. Freidrich (2002) ArticleTitlePractice makes perfect: Risk-free medical training with patient simulators JAMA 288 2808–2812

  3. D. Gaba S. Howard K. Fish B. Smith Y. Soub (2001) ArticleTitleSimulation in anesthesia crisis management: A decade of experience Simulation and Gaming. 32 IssueID2 175–193

  4. J.A. Gordon N.E. Oriol J.B. Cooper (2004) ArticleTitleBringing good teaching cases “to life”: A simulator-based medical education service Academic Medicine 79 IssueID1 23–27

  5. J.A. Gordon D.N. Tancredi W.D. Binder W.M. Wilkerson D.W. Shaffer (2003) ArticleTitleAssessment of a clinical performance evaluation tool for use in a simulator-based testing environment: A pilot study Academic Medicine 78 IssueID10 S45–S47

  6. S.B. Issenberg W.C. McGaghie I.R. Hart et al. (1999) ArticleTitleSimulation technology for health care professional skills training and assessment JAMA 282 IssueID9 861–866 Occurrence Handle10.1001/jama.282.9.861

  7. J.L. Maatsch (1981) ArticleTitleAssessment of clinical competence on the emergency medicine specialty certification examination: The validity of examiner ratings of simulated clinical encounters Annals of Emergency Medicine 10 504–507 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0196-0644(81)80003-0

  8. G.E. Miller (1990) ArticleTitleThe assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance Academic Medicine 65 IssueIDSuppl. 9 S63–S67

  9. P.J. Morgan D. Cleave-Hogg J. McIlroy J.H. Devitt (2002) ArticleTitleA comparison of experiential and visual learning for undergraduate medical students Anesthesiology 96 10–16 Occurrence Handle10.1097/00000542-200205000-00036

  10. D. Prideaux (2002) ArticleTitleResearching the outcomes of educational interventions: A matter of design [editorial] British Medical Journal 324 126–127

  11. T.L. Russel (1999) The No Significant Difference Phenomenon International Distance Education Certification Center (IDEC) Montgomery Alabama

  12. L.W. Schuwirth C.P. Vleuten Particlevan der (2003) ArticleTitleThe use of clinical simulations in assessment Medical Education 37 IssueIDSuppl. 1 65–71

  13. A. Tekian C.H. McGuire W.C. McGaghie et al. (1999) Innovative Simulations for Assessing Professional Competence: From Paper and Pencil to Virtual Reality Department of Medical Education University of Illinois at Chicago

  14. Twigg, C.A. (2001). Innovations in Online Learning: Moving Beyond No Significant Difference. Troy, New York: The Pew Technolgy and Learning Program at the Center for Academic Transformation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. http://www.center.rpi.edu/PewSym/Mono4.pdf. Accessed November 23, 2004.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to James A. Gordon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gordon, J.A., Shaffer, D.W., Raemer, D.B. et al. A Randomized Controlled Trial of Simulation-Based Teaching versus Traditional Instruction in Medicine: A Pilot Study among Clinical Medical Students. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 11, 33–39 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-004-7346-7

Download citation


  • Myocardial Infarction
  • Medical Student
  • Change Score
  • Clinical Performance
  • Randomized Control