A H Morrell, J M Harvey-Lloyd, B E Macpherson, N D Quinton
The reviewed studies provide valuable insights into simulation-based education for diagnostic imaging students; however, methodological reporting was variable. The findings suggest limited engagement with qualitative paradigms, reflexive reporting and analytic decision-making, contributing to patterns of residual positivism and analyses that often remained close to topic summaries or description.
INTRODUCTION: Simulation-based education is widely used in radiography and sonography training. Qualitative research offers important insights into student experiences, but methodological reporting remains a concern. This scoping review maps the reporting characteristics of qualitative radiology simulation-based education studies and examines how methodological decisions and features associated with qualitative rigour are reported.
METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O'Malley's framework. Multiple databases were searched for peer-reviewed qualitative studies exploring diagnostic imaging students' experiences of simulation-based education. Data extraction was guided by the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. A thematic analysis, following Braun and Clarke, was undertaken to examine patterns in methodological reporting.
RESULTS: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies consistently reported core elements, including title/abstract, aims, problem formulation, participant group, simulation context, data collection method, limitations and ethics. Reporting was variable for research paradigms, sampling rationale, trustworthiness, reflexivity, and analytic procedures. Three themes were generated: (1) Residual Positivism - reflects the influence of positivist assumptions in qualitative inquiry; (2) The Missing Researcher - illustrates limited reflexivity; and (3) Stuck in Description - describes thematic analyses that remain close to topic summaries or descriptive accounts.
CONCLUSION: The reviewed studies provide valuable insights into simulation-based education for diagnostic imaging students; however, methodological reporting was variable. The findings suggest limited engagement with qualitative paradigms, reflexive reporting and analytic decision-making, contributing to patterns of residual positivism and analyses that often remained close to topic summaries or description.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Qualitative radiology simulation-based education research should prioritise transparent methodological reporting, explicit engagement with research paradigms, and reflexivity to support methodological coherence and deeper analysis. Engagement with non-positivist qualitative paradigms and reflexivity may support richer interpretations of students' experiences of simulation-based education.