ArticleCureus2021
Breaking Bad News: A Randomized Trial Assessing Resident Performance After Novel Video Instruction.
Article in Cureus, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reflecting on 25 years of SPIKES: bad news communication in our modern era.The oncologist · 2026Article
- Breaking bad news: an active learning method for medical students.BMC medical education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Delivering bad news to patients is an essential skill for physicians, which is often developed through patient encounters. Residents in our program participate in objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) on an annual basis to evaluate their skills in these scenarios. Our objectives were to develop an educational video and determine if an educational video provided to residents prior to OSCEs would improve performance. Methods Previous OSCEs were reviewed to identify best practices and to create a four-minute video highlighting the "do's and don'ts" of delivering bad news. Residents in two post-graduate year (PGY) classes were randomized to watch the video prior to or after a standardized patient encounter. Three masked reviewers assessed resident empathy, attention, and understanding on 10 five-point Likert scales and assigned a total score (scale: 0-50). Hedges' g was used to assess mean scores and effect size. Results A total of 17 residents participated in the evaluation: nine in the pre-OSCE video group and eight in the control group. Residents randomized to the video prior to the patient encounter had a mean score of 37.01 (SD=3.6). Residents randomized to the control group had a mean score of 35.38 (SD=4.85). Hedges' g was 0.37 (95% CI: -0.59 to 1.33). Conclusion Residents randomized to the video group had a small increase in OSCE performance, which was not statistically significant. The novel video was helpful and addresses the need for a quick pre-assessment educational tool, though interns and graduating medical students may be a more appropriate target audience for instruction.
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.