ArticleThe journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM
Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2018.
Article in The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Residency Education Reform Program in Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care: An Academic Reform Model.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2021Article
- Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2019.The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPMArticle
- Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2020.The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPMReview
- Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2021.The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPMReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThrough a critical appraisal of the education research in anesthesiology, this article enables those interested in the field to read the high-quality articles for the past year and possibly implement these evidence-based interventions and concepts into practice. This study reviews and appraises all medical education studies published in 2018 in anesthesiology and summarizes the highest-rated articles evaluated.
methodsThree Ovid MEDLINE databases, Embase.com, ERIC, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched followed by a manual review of articles published in the highest impact factor journals in both the fields of anesthesiology and medical education. Abstracts were double-screened and quantitative articles subsequently scored by 3 randomly assigned raters. Qualitative studies were scored by 2 raters. Two different rubrics were used for scoring quantitative and qualitative studies, both allowed for scores ranging from 1 to 25.
resultsA total of 888 unique citations were identified through the search criteria. Of those, 39 articles met the inclusion criteria (36 quantitative and 3 qualitative). The top 11 quantitative papers and the top qualitative paper with the highest scores were reported and summarized.
conclusionsAs the second article to critically review the literature available for education in anesthesiology, we are able to add to this annual series to help further disseminate the articles of the highest quality in anesthesiology education. Because this is only the second year, we can only report on initial suggestions of trends that we hope will help guide future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32432152PMC7219027What 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.