Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16704405›Full record

SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2006

Use of handheld computers in medical education. A systematic review.

Anna Kho, Laura E Henderson, Daniel D Dressler, Sunil Kripalani

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. A systematic review of healthcare applications for smartphones.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2012
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anna KhoEmory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. apham@emory.edu
Laura E Henderson
Daniel D Dressler
Sunil Kripalani

Funding

Training in Medication Compliance and Health LiteracyK23HL077597 · NHLBI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI KRIPALANI, SUNIL · 2004 to 2008
$636k
NHLBI NIH HHS 1 K23 HL077597NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL077597
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past decade, handheld computers (or personal digital assistants [PDAs]) have become a popular tool among medical trainees and physicians. Few comprehensive reviews of PDA use in medicine have been published.

objectiveWe systematically reviewed the literature to (1) describe medical trainees' use of PDAs for education or patient care, (2) catalog popular software applications, and (3) evaluate the impact of PDA use on patient care. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1993 to 2004), medical education-related conference proceedings, and hand search of article bibliographies. REVIEW

methodsWe identified articles and abstracts that described the use of PDAs in medical education by trainees or educators. Reports presenting a qualitative or quantitative evaluation were included.

resultsSixty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Approximately 60% to 70% of medical students and residents use PDAs for educational purposes or patient care. Satisfaction was generally high and correlated with the level of handheld computer experience. Most of the studies included described PDA use for patient tracking and documentation. By contrast, trainees rated medical textbooks, medication references, and medical calculators as the most useful applications. Only 1 randomized trial with educational outcomes was found, demonstrating improved learning and application of evidence-based medicine with use of PDA-based decision support software. No articles reported the impact of PDA use on patient outcomes.

conclusionMost medical trainees find handhelds useful in their medical education and patient care. Further studies are needed to evaluate how PDAs impact learning and clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelAttitude to ComputersEducation, MedicalComputers, HandheldHumansInternship and ResidencyPatient CareStudents, Medical

Identifiers

PMID16704405
PMCPMC1484794

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.