ArticleJournal of educational evaluation for health professions2019
Development of a checklist to validate the framework of a narrative medicine program based on Gagne's instructional design model in Iran through consensus of a multidisciplinary expert panel.
Article in Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of narrative medicine program in promoting professional ethics: perceptions of Iranian medical students.Journal of medical ethics and history of medicine · 2021Article
- Impact of narrative medicine program on improving reflective capacity and empathy of medical students in Iran.Journal of educational evaluation for health professions · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeNarrative medicine is a patient-centered approach focusing on the development of narrative skills and self-awareness that incorporates "attending, representing, and affiliating" in clinical encounters. Acquiring narrative competency promotes clinical performance, and narratives can be used for teaching professionalism, empathy, multicultural education, and professional development. This study was conducted to develop a checklist to validate the framework of a narrative medicine program through consensus of a panel.
methodsThis expert panel study was conducted from 2018 to 2019 at Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Iran. It included 2 phases: developing a framework in 2 steps and forming an expert panel to validate the framework in 3 rounds. We adapted a 3-stage narrative medicine model with 9 training activities from Gagne's theory, developed a framework, and then produced a checklist to validate the framework in a multidisciplinary expert panel that consisted of 7 experts. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used to assess the experts' agreement. The first-round opinions were received by email. Consensus was achieved in the second and third rounds through face-to-face meetings to facilitate interactions and discussion among the experts.
resultsSixteen valid indicators were approved and 100% agreement was obtained among experts (with median values in the range of 7-9 out of a maximum of 9, with no disagreement), and the framework was validated by the expert panel.
conclusionThe 16 checklist indicators can be used to evaluate narrative medicine programs as a simple and practical guide to improve teaching effectiveness and promote life-long learning.
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.