Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34124349›Full record

ArticleMedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources2021

An Advanced Communication Skills Workshop Using Standardized Patients for Senior Medical Students.

Jaideep S Talwalkar, Auguste H Fortin, Laura J Morrison, Alan Kliger, David I Rosenthal, Tanya Murtha, Matthew S Ellman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources, 2021. 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. Article
  2. Anger De-escalation: A Standardized Patient Workshop for Third- and Fourth-Year Medical Students.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Values and Uncertainty at End of Life: A Standardized Patient Case for Preclinical Medical Students.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  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

7 authors.

Jaideep S TalwalkarAssociate Professor, Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics, and Director of Clinical Skills, Yale School of Medicine.ORCID 0000-0003-2471-8159
Auguste H FortinProfessor, Department of Medicine, and Director of Communication Skills Education, Yale School of Medicine.
Laura J MorrisonAssociate Professor, Department of Medicine, and Director of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Fellowship, Yale School of Medicine.
Alan KligerClinical Professor, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine.
David I RosenthalAssistant Professor, Department of Medicine, and Director of Capstone Course, Yale School of Medicine.
Tanya MurthaAssistant Professor, Department of Pediatrics (Critical Care Medicine), Columbia University.
Matthew S EllmanProfessor, Department of Medicine, and Director of Medical Student Palliative and End-of-Life Care Education, Yale School of Medicine.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Medical students often lack training in advanced communication skills encompassing emotionally fraught situations and those in which an intense emotional response is expected. Such skills are required for clinical situations encountered during residency. We created and evaluated an advanced communication skills workshop (ACSW) using standardized patients for senior medical students. The workshop emphasized communication skills for four scenarios-strong emotion, goals of care, medical error, and palliative care assessment-and utilized formative peer assessment and feedback. Methods: We created the four ACSW cases with case-specific communication behavior checklists and a common modified Master Interview Rating Scale in a Capstone Course for senior medical students. In groups of three, students rotated through three of four stations. Each student conducted one of the interviews while the other two completed the checklists and provided verbal feedback. We performed one-way analyses of variance on Likert responses and content analysis on open responses on a post-ACSW survey. Results: Ninety-one students completed the ACSW and survey. Students assigned high value to all four ACSW student roles: interviewer, observer, feedback recipient, and feedback provider. Students rated the experience above average to excellent on nearly all survey items. Open-response themes included "liked the opportunity to give or receive peer feedback" (46%) and "found the checklists helpful" (45%). Discussion: Feasible and well received by senior medical students, our ACSW offers an opportunity to practice and observe advanced communication skills and peer feedback. A peer-assisted, formative learning model, the ACSW efficiently addresses a key aspect of residency preparation.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateInternship and ResidencyStudents, MedicalCommunicationFeedbackHumansClinical Skills Assessment/OSCEsCommunication SkillsEnd of Life/Palliative CareGoals of CareMedical ErrorsPeer-Assisted LearningStandardized PatientStrong Emotion

Identifiers

PMID34124349
PMCPMC8155077

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.