Observational studyPloS one2020
What and how are students taught about communicating risks to patients? Analysis of a medical curriculum.
Observational study in PloS one, 2020. 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.
- Talking, not training, increased the accuracy of physicians' diagnosis of their patients' preferences for colon cancer screening.Patient education and counseling · 2024Trial
- A mixed methods evaluation of an online climate change and health certificate program for working professionals.BMC public health · 2025Article
- What do the teachers want? A targeted needs assessment survey for prospective didactic training of psychiatry medical educators.GMS journal for medical education · 2024Article
- Teaching clinicians shared decision making and risk communication online: an evaluation study.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCommunication is a core competence in medical care. Failure of physicians to properly communicate inherent risks of medical interventions has been linked with inadequate training at school. This study analyses a medical curriculum for assessing the content and quality of teaching risk communication to students.
methodsA checklist based on the national guidelines of core competencies on risk communication required of physicians was developed. Participant observers surveyed all teaching sessions at a medical school during a semester to record the frequency, characteristics and clinical context used by lectures during classes. Data were analyzed using statistical and descriptive methods to determine the prevalence and quality of teaching content.
results231 teaching sessions were surveyed. The inter-rater reliability was 81%. Lecturers mentioned topics of risk communication in 61.5% of teaching sessions (83.7% in surgery, 43.3% in internal medicine) but core biostatistics concepts were not discussed in more than 80% of these sessions. Important topics such as patient safety and preventable diseases were underrepresented. Risk communication was mainly taught in large-group, theoretical sessions and rarely with supplementary teaching material (7.4%). Students asked questions in 15.2% of courses, more often in surgery classes than in internal medicine.
conclusionStatistical and clinical topics relevant for teaching risk communication to medical students are not only underrepresented but also minimally explained by lecturers. Supplementary material on risk communication is rarely provided to students during classes. High-resource demanding, small-group teaching formats are not necessarily interactive as students ask few questions.
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.