ArticleKorean journal of family medicine2016
Comparison of Medical Students' Satisfaction with Family Medicine Clerkships between University Hospitals and Community Hospitals or Clinics.
Article in Korean journal of family medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Sex, Race, Ethnicity, and Income With Sustained and Cultivated Interest in Internal Medicine.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Development of the Undergraduate Rotation Satisfaction Questionnaire and its Validation in a Psychiatry Clerkship.Actas espanolas de psiquiatria · 2025Article
- Assessing clinical associate students' views on learning opportunities and involvement during primary health care placements: a mixed methods study in Tshwane.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Voluntary assignments during the pediatric clerkship to enhance the clinical experiences of medical students in the United StatesJournal of educational evaluation for health professions · 2020Article
- Medical students' satisfaction with clinical clerkship and its relationship with professional self-concept.Korean journal of medical education · 2019Article
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
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare students' awareness of and satisfaction with clerkships in family medicine between a university hospital and a community hospital or clinic.
methodsThirty-eight 4th year medical students who were undergoing a clerkship in family medicine in the 1st semester of 2012 were surveyed via questionnaire. The questionnaire was administered both before and after the clerkship.
resultsExternal clerkships were completed in eight family medicine clinics and two regional hospitals. At preclerkship, participants showed strong expectation for understanding primary care and recognition of the need for community clerkship, mean scores of 4.3±0.5 and 4.1±0.7, respectively. At post-clerkship, participants showed a significant increase in recognition of the need for community clerkship (4.7±0.5, P<0.001). The pre-clerkship recognition of differences in patient characteristics between university hospitals and community hospitals or clinics was 4.1±0.7; at post-clerkship, it was 3.9±0.7. Students' confidence in their ability to see a first-visit patient and their expectation of improved interviewing skills both significantly increased at post-clerkship (P<0.01). Satisfaction with feedback from preceptors and overall satisfaction with the clerkship also significantly increased, but only for the university hospital clerkship (P<0.01).
conclusionStudents' post-clerkship satisfaction was uniformly high for both clerkships. At pre-clerkship, students were aware of the differences in patient characteristics between university hospitals and community hospitals or clinics, and this awareness did not change by the end of the clerkship.
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.