ArticleAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education2011
An elective course in differential diagnostics.
Article in American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Is it time to start teaching basic diagnostics?American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo design an elective course to teach the principles of differential diagnostics to second-year pharmacy students, critically evaluate the benefits of this approach to self-directed learning, and assess obstacles to implementation that other programs may encounter.
designStudents attended seven 2-hour class sessions in which the instructor presented a chief complaint, and the class researched and discussed possible causes and arrived at the accurate diagnosis. Each student also was assigned a unique, simulated patient case to work on outside of class. Students asked questions and researched the answers, providing a written rationale for needing the information and the source of the information. Students gave a 10-minute presentation on their diagnosis and treatment recommendations during the last class session. ASSESSMENT: All students (N = 21) successfully determined their patients' diagnoses and made appropriate treatment recommendations. Fifteen students reported that the most valuable information in solving their case was subjective rather than objective in nature (ie, interviewing the patient rather than reviewing laboratory test results). The majority of the 15 students who completed a post-course survey instrument agreed or strongly agreed that this elective allowed them to practice varied skill sets and integrate past and future curricular content.
conclusionPharmD students may benefit from instruction in the basic principles of differential diagnostics.
Indexed as
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.