ArticleBMJ open2020
Cross-sectional questionnaire study to gather the teaching preferences and expectations of UK undergraduate medical students for culinary medicine learning.
Article in BMJ open, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Culinary medicine: exploring diet with tomorrow's doctors.Canadian medical education journal · 2021Article
- Nutrition education in core medical curricula: a call to action from tomorrow's doctors.Future healthcare journal · 2021Article
- Bringing the "Joy of Healthy Eating" to Advanced Medical Students: Utilizing a Remote Learning Platform to Teach Culinary Medicine: Findings from the First Online Course Based on the ACLM's Whole-Food Plant-Based Culinary Medicine Curriculum.American journal of lifestyle medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo determine undergraduate medical students' teaching preferences and expectations for Culinary Medicine (CM) learning with a view to informing development of a CM course at a UK medical school.
settingA single, urban UK medical school.
participants180 undergraduate medical students. STUDY
designA cross-sectional questionnaire study collecting quantitative and qualitative (free-text) data. METHODS AND OUTCOME MEASURES: An online questionnaire consisting of 16 questions of various styles (Likert-type, multiple choice and free-text). Quantitative analysis of multiple choice and Likert-type scale questions was conducted. Qualitative thematic analysis was used to analyse the free-text responses and identify themes.
resultsThree core themes related to students' understanding of CM were identified: (1) 'CM Learning': students' perceived relevance of CM knowledge, perceived relevance of CM to healthcare and their expectations for teaching; (2) 'The Relationship between Food and Health': links between diet, social factors and health; and (3) 'Evidence-based Medicine': students' perceptions about scientific principles underlying CM. Quantitative analysis revealed that, although 83% of students felt that learning CM is important for their future clinical practice, 56% felt unable to take a dietary history. 73% of students were dissatisfied with the quality, and 78% were dissatisfied with the quantity, of existing medical school teaching understood to be relevant to CM. Topics that students would like to be taught on a CM course included weight management and portion control. Students felt that problem-based style learning would be the most appropriate method for delivering CM teaching.
conclusionsThis study revealed that medical students felt their dietary counsulting skills could be improved with further clinically relevant teaching in the undergraduate medical curriculum. Students' preferences for CM learning have been taken into consideration in the development of a CM course for fifth-year undergraduate students at a UK medical school, which is delivered during their General Practice placement.
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.