ArticleOsteopathic medicine and primary care2010
Learning outcomes from a biomedical research course for second year osteopathic medical students.
Article in Osteopathic medicine and primary care, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Assessments of Research Competencies for Clinical Investigators: A Systematic Review.Evaluation & the health professions · 2021Pooled it
- Contemporary global perspectives of medical students on research during undergraduate medical education: a systematic literature review.Medical education online · 2018Pooled it
- Team-, case-, lecture- and evidence-based learning in medical postgraduates training.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Factors affecting the scientific research ability and the corresponding countermeasures in clinical postgraduates.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Now, I think doctors can be heroes … Medical student's attitudes towards the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on key aspects of medical education and how the image of the medical profession has changed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2022Article
- Teaching Medical Research to Medical Students: a Systematic Review.Medical science educator · 2021Review
- A Nationwide Virtual Research Education Program for Medical Students in Pakistan: Methodological Framework, Feasibility Testing, and Outcomes.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Guidelines for Evaluating Clinical Research Training using Competency Assessments.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2019Article
- Teaching evidence-based medicine at complementary and alternative medicine institutions: strategies, competencies, and evaluation.Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA ubiquitous dilemma in medical education continues to be whether and how to integrate research competencies into the predoctoral curriculum. Understanding research concepts is imbedded in the six core competencies for physicians, but predoctoral medical education typically does not explicitly include research education. In an effort to quickly report academic research findings to the field, this is the second in a series of articles reporting the outcomes of a research education initiative at one college of osteopathic medicine. The first article described the competency model and reported baseline performance in applied understanding of targeted research concepts. This second article reports on the learning outcomes from the inaugural year of a course in basic biomedical research concepts.
methodsThis course consisted of 24 total hours of classroom lectures augmented with web-based materials using Blackboard Vista, faculty moderated student presentations of research articles, and quizzes. To measure changes in applied understanding of targeted research concepts in the inaugural year of the course, we administered a pretest and a posttest to second year students who took the course and to first year students who took an informatics course in the same academic year.
resultsWe analyzed 154 matched pretests and posttests representing 56% of the 273 first and second year students. On average, the first year (53) and second year students (101) did not differ in their mean pretest scores. At posttest the second year students showed significant improvement in their applied understanding of the concepts, whereas the first year students' mean posttest score was lower than their mean pretest score.
conclusionsThis biomedical research course appears to have increased the second year students' applied understanding of the targeted biomedical research concepts. This assessment of learning outcomes has facilitated the quality improvement process for the course, and improved our understanding of how to measure the benefits of research education for medical students. Some of the course content and methods, and the outcome measures may need to be approached differently in the future to more effectively lay the foundation for osteopathic medical students to utilize these concepts in the clinical setting.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.