ArticleJournal of the American Podiatric Medical Association2018
Differences in Faculty and Standardized Patient Scores on Professionalism for Second-Year Podiatric Medical Students During a Standardized Simulated Patient Encounter.
Article in Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Simulation in podiatry teaching and learning: A scoping review.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study examined the differences between faculty and trained standardized patient (SP) evaluations on student professionalism during a second-year podiatric medicine standardized simulated patient encounter.
methodsForty-nine second-year podiatric medicine students were evaluated for their professionalism behavior. Eleven SPs performed an assessment in real-time, and one faculty member performed a secondary assessment after observing a videotape of the encounter. Five domains were chosen for evaluation from a validated professionalism assessment tool.
resultsSignificant differences were identified in the professionalism domains of "build a relationship" ( P = .008), "gather information" ( P = .001), and share information ( P = .002), where the faculty scored the students higher than the SP for 24.5%, 18.9%, and 26.5% of the cases, respectively. In addition, the faculty scores were higher than the SP scores in all of the "gather information" subdomains; however, the difference in scores was significant only in the "question appropriately" ( P = .001) and "listen and clarify" ( P = .003) subdomains.
conclusionsThis study showed that professionalism scores for second-year podiatric medical students during a simulated patient encounter varied significantly between faculty and SPs. Further consideration needs to be given to determine the source of these differences.
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.