Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32807145›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2020

Assessing the benefits and usefulness of Schwartz Centre rounds in second-year medical students using clinical educator-facilitated group work session: not just "a facilitated moan"!

J Smith, M G Stewart, E Foggin, S Mathews, J Harris, P Thomas, A Cooney, C J Stocker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2020. 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. 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

8 authors.

J SmithMedical School, University of Buckingham, Hunter Street, Buckingham, MK18 1EG, UK.
M G StewartMedical School, University of Buckingham, Hunter Street, Buckingham, MK18 1EG, UK.
E FogginMedical School, University of Buckingham, Hunter Street, Buckingham, MK18 1EG, UK.
S MathewsMedical School, University of Buckingham, Hunter Street, Buckingham, MK18 1EG, UK.
J HarrisMedical School, University of Buckingham, Hunter Street, Buckingham, MK18 1EG, UK.
P ThomasMedical School, University of Buckingham, Hunter Street, Buckingham, MK18 1EG, UK.
A CooneyMedical School, University of Buckingham, Hunter Street, Buckingham, MK18 1EG, UK.
C J StockerMedical School, University of Buckingham, Hunter Street, Buckingham, MK18 1EG, UK. claire.stocker@buckingham.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0178-7349

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn experiential curriculum exposing medical students to the clinic early has many benefits but comes with the emotional stress this environment engenders. Schwartz rounds (SR) are an effective means to combat emotional stress and increasingly used in UK and USA hospitals. Recent studies show that the SR format may also provide benefits for medical students. This study aimed to investigate whether the guidance of SR in second year medical students provides the same benefits as to healthcare professionals.

methodsSR assessment involved 83 s year MBChB students in facilitated groupwork sessions. Topics discussed were "change and resilience" and "duty of candour". Students completed a Likert Scale questionnaire evaluating outcomes proffered by the Point of Care Foundation in collaboration with the Schwartz Foundation, with freeform feedback.

resultsThere was an 86% completion rate with 25% providing written feedback. Participants were more likely to agree than disagree that SR were beneficial. SR effectiveness in enhancing students' working relationship awareness and skills was strongly correlated with understanding the purpose of, and engagement with, the SR (P < 0.001). Similarly, engagement with the SR was strongly correlated with self-reporting of enhanced patient-centredness (P < 0.001). Freeform feedback could be grouped into five themes that revolved around understanding of the SR and engagement with the process. Many positive comments regarded the SR as a forum not only to "learn experientially" but to so in a "safe environment". Many negative comments stemmed from students not seeing any benefits of engagement with the SR, in that sharing experiences was "unbeneficial", "empathy is inherent and not learnt", or that sharing emotional problems is simply "moaning".

conclusionSRs are an effective way of fostering empathy and understanding towards patients and colleagues. However, for the students to benefit fully from the SR it is necessary for them to engage and understand the process. Therefore, for the successful implementation of SR into pre-clinical medical education, it is important to help students realise that SR are not merely a "facilitated whinge".

Indexed as

Education, MedicalEducation, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalTeaching RoundsCurriculumEmpathyHumansCompassionEmpathyResilienceSRUndergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID32807145
PMCPMC7433116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.