Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30718971›Full record

ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2019

Teaching methods used by internal medicine residents on rounds: what works?

Vivek T Kulkarni, Sanjay M Salgado, Stephen R Pelletier, Helen M Shields

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Vivek T KulkarniDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Sanjay M SalgadoHospitalist Service, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Stephen R PelletierOffice of Educational Quality Improvement, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Helen M ShieldsHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA, hmshields@bwh.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe specific teaching methods used by internal medicine residents on walk rounds are unknown.

objectives1) To characterize in real time the specific teaching methods used by internal medicine residents on rounds and 2) to identify attributes of successful resident teaching on rounds. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a prospective mixed-methods study on inpatient medical services at a single academic medical center from September 2016 to January 2017. Participants were internal medicine residents (postgraduate year [PGY]-1, PGY-2, and PGY-3) and attending physicians. Teachers were PGY-2 and PGY-3 residents, and learners were PGY-1 residents. Residents' teaching on rounds was observed and characterized according to resident demographics, specific teaching methods, and length of time. Participants completed a survey with Likert scale and free-text questions. RESULTS AND

conclusionAmong 136 surveys across 28 separate teaching encounters, we noted that PGY-3 residents' teaching was rated significantly better than PGY-2 residents' teaching. Teaching lasting >1 minute was rated significantly better than teaching lasting <1 minute. Free-text responses emphasized the value of immediate clinical relevance, citing published evidence, conciseness, clarity, and pertinence to the patient. Our findings may help guide internal medicine residents aiming to teach better on rounds and inform further research into specific resident teaching methods.

Indexed as

direct observationinternal medicinemixed methodsresident teaching

Identifiers

PMID30718971
PMCPMC6345188

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.