Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33062495›Full record

ReviewCureus2020

An Evidence-Based Guide for Medical Students: How to Optimize the Use of Expanded-Retrieval Platforms.

Cyrus A Pumilia, Spencer Lessans, David Harris

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

3 authors.

Cyrus A PumiliaMedicine, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, USA.
Spencer LessansMedicine, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, USA.
David HarrisMedical Education, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recommendations have been made for improving medical education based on the available evidence regarding learning. Traditional learning methods in medical education (e.g. reading from textbooks) do not ensure long-term retention. However, expanded-retrieval studying methods have been shown to improve studying efficiency. Using evidence-based practices to optimize an expanded-retrieval platform has the potential to greatly benefit knowledge acquisition and retention for medical students. This literature review was conducted to identify the best practices of expanded-retrieval platforms. Themes within learning that promote knowledge gain and retention include presentation of related categorical information, schema formation, dual-coding, concrete examples, elaboration, changes in text appearance, and interleaving. Presentation of related categorical material together may mitigate retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF). Spaced retrieval helps to reinforce schema formation by solidifying the framework the individual students form when learning the material. Dual-coding improves learning by creating more neural pathways. Multiple concrete examples can be compared by students to see their respective differences, highlighting the true underlying principle. Variation in text appearance is most useful during the initial, short-term inter-study intervals. Interleaving is a theme where different topics are combined in the same study session and is unpopular with students but shown to be successful. Students' subjective competency ratings of new material are largely inaccurate. More in-depth processing and learning methods that give off a sense of lower competency are actually associated with improved long-term retention. Expanded-retrieval platforms should utilize these evidence-based components of learning to increase knowledge gain and retention within all fields of medical education.

Indexed as

active learningankievidence-based learningexpanded-retrievalknowledge acquisitionmedical educationoptimizationretentionretrievalspaced repetition

Identifiers

PMID33062495
PMCPMC7550004

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.