Skip to main content

Table 4 Results of satisfaction, motivation and professional impact self-assessment

From: Comparative value of a simulation by gaming and a traditional teaching method to improve clinical reasoning skills necessary to detect patient deterioration: a randomized study in nursing students

 SG group (n = 73)TT group (n = 73)p
Are you globally satisfied with this training course?
1 (not satisfied) to 10 (very satisfied)
8.5 ± 1.67.6 ± 1.70.001*
Are you globally satisfied with the educational tool used for case-based learning?
1 (not satisfied) to 10 (very satisfied)
8.5 ± 1.48.0 ± 1.60.04
Do you think that this training course motivates you to learn?
1 (absolutely not) to 10 (agree absolutely)
8.7 ± 1.97.7 ± 2.00.003*
Do you think that this training will have an impact on your future professional work?
1 (absolutely not) to 10 (agree absolutely)
8.3 ± 1.87.7 ± 1.70.06
Would you recommend this training to students or colleagues?
1 (absolutely not) to 10 (agree absolutely)
8.8 ± 1.77.8 ± 2.00.002*
  1. Results are presented as mean ± standard deviation or percentage. Comparisons were carried out with the use of the Student’s t test or a Chi2 test. The Bonferroni criterion was set at alpha/5 = 0.01 to reach statistical significance; *: p value less than 0.01 was considered significant