Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28464857›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2017

Communication skills of medical students during the OSCE: Gender-specific differences in a longitudinal trend study.

Joachim Graf, Robert Smolka, Elisabeth Simoes, Stephan Zipfel, Florian Junne, Friederike Holderried, Annette Wosnik, Anne M Doherty, Karina Menzel, Anne Herrmann-Werner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 108 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Medical student perceptions of establishing effective clinical communication: a qualitative study.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Joachim GrafMedical Faculty Tuebingen, Dean's Office for Students' Affairs, Geissweg 5/1, D-72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Robert SmolkaDRK Clinic Center Berlin, Hospital for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Spandauer Damm 130, D-14050, Berlin, Germany.
Elisabeth SimoesDepartment of Women's Health, Research Institute for Women's Health, University Hospital Tuebingen, Calwerstrasse 7, D-72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Stephan ZipfelMedical Faculty Tuebingen, Dean's Office for Students' Affairs, Geissweg 5/1, D-72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Florian JunneDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tuebingen, Internal Medicine, Osianderstrasse 5, D-72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Friederike HolderriedDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Tuebingen, Internal Medicine, Otfried-Müller-Strasse 10, D-72076, Tübingen, Germany. friederike.holderried@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Annette WosnikMedical Faculty Tuebingen, Dean's Office for Students' Affairs, Geissweg 5/1, D-72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Anne M DohertyDepartment of Psychiatry, University Hospital Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Karina MenzelSection of Public Health, University Hospital Duesseldorf, Moorenstrasse 5, D-40225, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Anne Herrmann-WernerDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tuebingen, Internal Medicine, Osianderstrasse 5, D-72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
University of Tübingen · DEDüsseldorf University Hospital · DEUniversity Hospital Galway · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommunication skills are essential in a patient-centred health service and therefore in medical teaching. Although significant differences in communication behaviour of male and female students are known, gender differences in the performance of students are still under-reported. The aim of this study was to analyse gender differences in communication skills of medical students in the context of an OSCE exam (OSCE = Objective Structured Clinical Examination).

methodsIn a longitudinal trend study based on seven semester-cohorts, it was analysed if there are gender differences in medical students' communication skills. The students (self-perception) and standardized patients (SP) (external perception) were asked to rate the communication skills using uniform questionnaires. Statistical analysis was performed by using frequency analyses and t-tests in SPSS 21.

resultsAcross all ratings in the self- and the external perception, there was a significant gender difference in favour of female students performing better in the dimensions of empathy, structure, verbal expression and non-verbal expression. The results of male students deteriorated across all dimensions in the external perception between 2011 and 2014. DISCUSSION &

conclusionIt is important to consider if gender-specific teaching should be developed, considering the reported differences between female and male students.

Indexed as

CommunicationEducational MeasurementProfessional CompetenceStudents, MedicalAdultFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleSex FactorsYoung AdultCommunications skillsGender differencesGender-specific teachingMedical studentsOsceSelf- and external perception

Identifiers

PMID28464857
PMCPMC5414383
OpenAlexW2610372708

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.