ArticleEmergency radiology2021
Assessment of final-year medical students' performance in diagnosing critical findings on chest X-ray.
Article in Emergency radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Diagnostic Radiology Among Clinical Year Medical Students.Cureus · 2024Article
- Review
- Clinical-year Students' Competency in Chest X-ray Interpretation: A Theoretical-based Intervention.Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDue to the recently emerging shortage in medical staff during the novel corona virus pandemic, several countries have rushed their undergraduate medical students into the emergency department. The accuracy of diagnosing critical findings on X-rays by senior medical students is not well assessed. In this study, we aim to assess the knowledge and accuracy of undergraduate final-year medical students in diagnosing life-threatening emergency conditions on chest x-ray.
methodThis is a cross-sectional nationwide survey across all medical schools in Jordan. Through an electronic questionnaire, participants were sequentially shown a total of six abnormal X-rays and one normal. For each X-ray, participants were asked to choose the most likely diagnosis, and to grade the degree of self-confidence regarding the accuracy of their answer in a score from 0 (not confident) to 10 (very confident).
resultsWe included a total of 530 participants. All participants answered at least six out of seven questions correctly, out of them, 139 (26.2%) participants answered all questions correctly. Pneumoperitoneum was the highest correct answer (93.8%), whereas flail chest was the least correctly answered case with only 310 (58.5%) correct answers. Regarding self-confidence for each question, 338 participants (63.8%) reported very high overall self-confidence level. Answers related to tension pneumothorax had the highest confidence level.
conclusionSenior Jordanian medical students showed good knowledge with high confidence levels in diagnosing life-threatening conditions on chest x-rays, supporting their incorporation in the emergency department during pandemics and confirming the reliability of information they can extract.
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.