Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33274291›Full record

ArticleMedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources2020

Peer-Developed Modules on Basic Biostatistics and Evidence-Based Medicine Principles for Undergraduate Medical Education.

Daniel H Mai, Jonathan S Taylor-Fishwick, William Sherred-Smith, Anthony Pang, Justin Yaworsky, Sean Whitty, Alex Lafever, Cody Mcilvain, Mark Schmitt, Michelle Rogers-Johnson and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Guide to Basic Statistics for Educational Research.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2021
    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

12 authors.

Daniel H MaiMedical Student, School of Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
Jonathan S Taylor-FishwickMedical Student, School of Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
William Sherred-SmithMedical Student, School of Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
Anthony PangMedical Student, School of Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
Justin YaworskyMedical Student, School of Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
Sean WhittyMedical Student, School of Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
Alex LafeverMedical Student, School of Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
Cody McilvainMedical Student, School of Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
Mark SchmittMedical Student, School of Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
Michelle Rogers-JohnsonDirector of Assessment, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
April PaceLibrarian, Eastern Virginia Medical School.
Anca D DobrianProfessor, Department of Physiological Sciences, Eastern Virginia Medical School.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is pivotal in shaping patient care, yet it is challenging to incorporate into undergraduate medical education (UME) due to a lack of dedicated resources within the preclinical curriculum. To address this challenge, we used a peer-led approach to explain difficult concepts through language that students can understand at their shared level of understanding. Methods: Four second-year medical students trained in EBM over 18 months by facilitating monthly journal clubs, ultimately leading to their involvement as peer-instructors. With input from a faculty expert, peer-instructors designed integrative PowerPoint modules and interactive problem sets on basic biostatistics and EBM principles. Assessment included formative quizzes with multiple attempts to achieve at least 80% to demonstrate mastery of core learning objectives. Afterwards, students were invited to provide feedback using a 5-point Likert scale survey. Results: Of second-year students who participated, all 151 demonstrated 80% competency on each quiz. Eighty-seven (58%) students completed the survey on which, 77% agreed/strongly agreed that their level of understanding of EBM improved after the peer-led sessions, 76% agreed/strongly agreed that the sessions were more conducive to learning compared to traditional lectures, and 94% agreed/strongly agreed that the material covered was relevant to the USMLE Step 1. Discussion: This peer-led approach has been rated as effective by learners, improving their ability to critically appraise and apply clinical evidence. To promote integration of EBM into UME, we have prepared modules, problem sets, quizzes, and an outline of the problem-solving sessions for universal adoption.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalBiostatisticsCurriculumEvidence-Based MedicineHumansBiostatisticsEvidence-Based MedicineFlipped ClassroomPeer-LearningProblem-Based LearningSelf-AssessmentSelf-Directed LearningSelf-Regulated LearningStatistics

Identifiers

PMID33274291
PMCPMC7703476

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.