Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30662384›Full record

ReviewJournal of Korean medical science2019

Critical Thinking and Scientific Writing Skills of Non-Anglophone Medical Students: a Model of Training Course.

Edward Barroga, Hiroshi Mitoma

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of Korean medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. COVID and Lung Cancer.Current oncology reports · 2021
    Review
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

2 authors.

Edward BarrogaDepartment of Medical Education, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8920-2607
Hiroshi MitomaDepartment of Medical Education, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0513-1811

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are currently very limited reports on the strengths and weaknesses of Japanese medical students in processing (i.e., searching, reading, synthesizing, writing, editing, refining) and presenting medical content based on scholarly journal articles. We developed and offered a 3-week group independent research course in English as a summer elective named "Improving Medical English Skills and Creating English Medical Content (PPT and video) Based on Medical Journal Articles" to our fourth-year Japanese medical students who follow a 6-year medical curriculum as the target audience. Herein, we describe the specific strengths and weaknesses of 6 students who chose and completed the course. Thereafter, we assessed the possible reasons underlying these weaknesses, pondered on the potential implications of such weaknesses on the critical thinking, logical reasoning, and communication skills of Japanese medical students, and suggested approaches to further enhance these skills. The assessments, implications, and suggestions given may provide medical educators new insights on how to newly organize educational and clinical programs to address such weaknesses, improve searching, reading, writing, editing, and presentation skills, enhance critical thinking and logical reasoning abilities, and gain in-depth knowledge essential for effectively appraising and communicating medical content.

Indexed as

Models, EducationalThinkingWritingCommunicationHumansResearchStudents, MedicalCommunication SkillsCritical ThinkingEditingJournal ArticleScientific Writing

Identifiers

PMID30662384
PMCPMC6335120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.