ArticleJournal of advances in medical education & professionalism2017
Evidence-based medicine in pre-clinical years: a study of early introduction and usefulness.
Article in Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of a Clinical Decision Support System on Team-Based Clinical Quiz Performance Among Japanese Medical Students: A Pre-Post Pilot Study.Journal of general and family medicine · 2026Article
- Key challenges and countermeasures: a review of undergraduate teaching of neurology in outpatient settings.BMC medical education · 2025Review
- Formal evidence-based medicine instruction in Turkish undergraduate medical education: an initial evaluation.BMC medical education · 2021Article
- Addressing barriers to the conduct and application of research in complementary and alternative medicine: a scoping review.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2021Article
- Factors Associated with Practicing Evidence-Based Medicine Among Medical Interns in Amhara Regional State Teaching Hospitals, Northwest Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Advances in medical education and practice · 2021Article
- Practical tips for teaching academic integrity in the digital age.MedEdPublish (2016) · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEvidence Based Medicine (EBM) has established itself as a strong predictor of future medical practice by medical students. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of EBM in pre-clinical years and reflect on self-assessment skill of 4
methodsAll of the 4
resultsTwenty-three students participated in the survey. 91% of them reported that EBM had helped them to better understand research process and 95% believed that EBM was necessary to develop clinical skills in the future. 78% of the students agreed that they were provided with enough resources for effective implementation of EBM in the university. All participants (100%) self reported that they could appraise the research articles effectively (mean score 8.26, S.D-1.45).
conclusionsEBM is an integrative and comprehensive way to successfully adopt concepts of acquired medical knowledge for effective medical practice. Early introduction of EBM in preclinical years proved favorable in students and better equipped them with the ability to critically apprehend and appraise new research and innovations in medicine for optimal learning experience. There is a definitive need for scientific and systematic design of the curriculum for early introduction of EBM in pre-clinical years, best suited for the students. The principles should be directed towards further research for the effective implementation of EBM to enhance clinical skills.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28761882PMC5522909W2725119282What 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.