Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16096306›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2005

Early practical experience and the social responsiveness of clinical education: systematic review.

Sonia Littlewood, Valmae Ypinazar, Stephen A Margolis, Albert Scherpbier, John Spencer, Tim Dornan

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
30.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

98 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 359 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Written information about individual medicines for consumers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009
    Pooled it
  3. Career choice in academic medicine: systematic review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2006
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Social Accountability in Clinical Education: A Scoping Review.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Sonia LittlewoodHope Hospital (University of Manchester School of Medicine), Manchester M6 8HD.
Valmae Ypinazar
Stephen A Margolis
Albert Scherpbier
John Spencer
Tim Dornan
Salford Royal Hospital · GBThe University of Queensland · AUMaastricht University · NLNewcastle University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo find how early experience in clinical and community settings ("early experience") affects medical education, and identify strengths and limitations of the available evidence.

designA systematic review rating, by consensus, the strength and importance of outcomes reported in the decade 1992-2001. DATA SOURCES: Bibliographical databases and journals were searched for publications on the topic, reviewed under the auspices of the recently formed Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) collaboration. SELECTION OF STUDIES: All empirical studies (verifiable, observational data) were included, whatever their design, method, or language of publication.

resultsEarly experience was most commonly provided in community settings, aiming to recruit primary care practitioners for underserved populations. It increased the popularity of primary care residencies, albeit among self selected students. It fostered self awareness and empathic attitudes towards ill people, boosted students' confidence, motivated them, gave them satisfaction, and helped them develop a professional identity. By helping develop interpersonal skills, it made entering clerkships a less stressful experience. Early experience helped students learn about professional roles and responsibilities, healthcare systems, and health needs of a population. It made biomedical, behavioural, and social sciences more relevant and easier to learn. It motivated and rewarded teachers and patients and enriched curriculums. In some countries, junior students provided preventive health care directly to underserved populations.

conclusionEarly experience helps medical students learn, helps them develop appropriate attitudes towards their studies and future practice, and orientates medical curriculums towards society's needs. Experimental evidence of its benefit is unlikely to be forthcoming and yet more medical schools are likely to provide it. Effort could usefully be concentrated on evaluating the methods and outcomes of early experience provided within non-experimental research designs, and using that evaluation to improve the quality of curriculums.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCareer ChoiceClinical CompetenceClinical MedicineEducational MeasurementEducational StatusEducation, Medical, UndergraduateEvidence-Based MedicineHumansStudents, MedicalTeaching

Identifiers

PMID16096306
PMCPMC1184253
OpenAlexW1992174050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.