Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30431453›Full record

ArticleAcademic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges2019

Computing for Medicine: Can We Prepare Medical Students for the Future?

Marcus Law, Paula Veinot, Jennifer Campbell, Michelle Craig, Maria Mylopoulos

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marcus LawM. Law is associate professor of family medicine and director, Foundations, MD Program, University of Toronto, and director of medical education, Michael Garron Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9746-6381. P. Veinot is an independent research consultant, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. J. Campbell is associate professor, Teaching Stream, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. M. Craig is associate professor, Teaching Stream, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. M. Mylopoulos is associate professor, Faculty of Medicine, and scientist, Wilson Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Paula Veinot
Jennifer Campbell
Michelle Craig
Maria Mylopoulos
Toronto East General Hospital · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

problemTechnology can transform health care; future physicians need to keep pace to ensure optimal patient care. Because future doctors are poorly prepared in computer literacy, the authors designed a computer programming certificate course. This Innovation Report describes the course and findings from a qualitative study to understand the ways it prepares medical students to use computing science and technology in medicine. APPROACH: The 14-month Computing for Medicine certificate course (C4M, offered beginning in February 2016), University of Toronto, is comprised of hands-on workshops to introduce programming accompanied by homework exercises, seminars by computer science experts on the application of programming to medicine, and coding projects. Using purposive and maximal variation sampling, 17 students who completed the course were interviewed from April-May 2017. Thematic analysis was performed using an iterative constant comparison approach. OUTCOMES: Participants praised the C4M as an opportunity to achieve computer literacy-including language, syntax, and fundamental computational ideas (and their application to medicine)-and acquire or strengthen algorithmic and logical thinking skills for approaching problems. They highlighted that the course illustrated linkages between computer science and medicine. Participants acknowledged a sometimes-existent chasm between producers and users of technology in medicine, recommending two-way communication between the disciplines when developing technology for use in medicine. NEXT STEPS: We recommend that medical schools consider computer literacy an essential skill to foster future collaborative computing partnerships for improved technology use by physicians and optimal patient care. We encourage further evaluation of future iterations of the C4M and similar courses.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBiomedical TechnologyCanadaCompetency-Based EducationFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleStudents, Medical

Identifiers

PMID30431453
PMCPMC6392202
OpenAlexW2901547687

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.