ArticleSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2021
[Virtual palliative care : Pilot study of an electronic tool to test cognitive, psychomotor and affective palliative medical and pain therapeutic learning contents during medical training].
Article in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Undergraduate palliative care teaching in times of COVID-19].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2021Review
- [Palliative Care Education].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis article describes a first use of an electronic case-based assessment tool in undergraduate palliative care education. It describes the development of the tool presenting strengths and shortcomings in order to contribute to an innovative design of assessment tools in medical education. DESIGN AND
methodAn electronic (virtual) case-based assessment tool (the virtual palliative patient, vPp) was developed. Palliative care levels of knowledge, skills and attitude of students were tested at a computer workplace as a voluntary and non-performance-relevant pilot project at four faculties.
resultsOn average the students achieved 80% of the points using the vPp tool, which is below the average score of 91% achieved in the regular examination. In particular, the free text task on reflection of dealing with the patient's death wish caused uncertainty, while multiple choice questions and an interactive conversation sequence were perceived as relatively easy. Technical problems were also identified in the evaluation but overall the concept was evaluated positively and establishment as a regular examination or e‑learning tool was desired.
conclusionThe implementation of an innovative assessment tool in medical education is technically challenging. A coordination with contents of the individual faculties is necessary in order that students do not have a feeling of a lack of preparation. The development of the vPp describes an innovative assessment format. In the long term, all interested faculties could receive a form of toolbox containing the technical framework of the assessment tool, which can then be fed with new contents.
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.