Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29606098›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2018

Learning from errors: assessing final year medical students' reflection on safety improvement, five year cohort study.

Vicki Tully, Douglas Murphy, Evridiki Fioratou, Arun Chaudhuri, James Shaw, Peter Davey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Vicki TullyMedical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland.
Douglas MurphyMedical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland.
Evridiki FioratouMedical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland.
Arun ChaudhuriNHS Tayside, Dundee, Scotland.
James ShawNHS Tayside, Dundee, Scotland.
Peter DaveyMedical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland. p.g.davey@dundee.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInvestigation of real incidents has been consistently identified by expert reviews and student surveys as a potentially valuable teaching resource for medical students. The aim of this study was to adapt a published method to measure resident doctors' reflection on quality improvement and evaluate this as an assessment tool for medical students.

methodsThe design is a cohort study. Medical students were prepared with a tutorial in team based learning format and an online Managing Incident Review course. The reliability of the modified Mayo Evaluation of Reflection on Improvement tool (mMERIT) was analysed with Generalizability G-theory. Long term sustainability of assessment of incident review with mMERIT was tested over five consecutive years.

resultsA total of 824 students have completed an incident review using 167 incidents from NHS Tayside's online reporting system. In order to address the academic practice gap students were supervised by Senior Charge Nurses or Consultants on the wards where the incidents had been reported. Inter-rater reliability was considered sufficiently high to have one assessor for each student report. There was no evidence of a gradient in student marks across the academic year. Marks were significantly higher for students who used Section Questions to structure their reports compared with those who did not. In Year 1 of the study 21 (14%) of 153 mMERIT reports were graded as concern. All 21 of these students achieved the required standard on resubmission. Rates of resubmission were lower (3% to 7%) in subsequent years.

conclusionsWe have shown that mMERIT has high reliability with one rater. mMERIT can be used by students as part of a suite of feedback to help supplement their self-assessment on their learning needs and develop insightful practice to drive their development of quality, safety and person centred professional practice. Incident review addresses the need for workplace based learning and use of real life examples of mistakes, which has been identified by previous studies of education about patient safety in medical schools.

Indexed as

Formative FeedbackMedical ErrorsPatient SafetyCohort StudiesEducation, Medical, UndergraduateHumansReproducibility of ResultsSelf-AssessmentStudents, MedicalIncident reviewMedical studentsPatient safetyProfessionalismReflection

Identifiers

PMID29606098
PMCPMC5879916

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.