ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2021
A simulation-based module in pharmacology education reveals and addresses medical students' deficits in leading prescription talks.
Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Should we consider gender aspects in pharmacology teaching? No-we must!Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- What role do traditional pharmacology textbooks play in medical students' education and exam preparation?Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Article
- Enhancing pharmacology education through role-play: impact on student attitudes.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Interprofessional Educational Interventions to Improve Pharmacological Knowledge and Prescribing Competency in Medical Students and Trainees: A Scoping Review.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Factors associated with Peruvian students' knowledge of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug management in pediatric dentistry: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Article
- What makes a multidisciplinary medication review and deprescribing intervention for older people work well in primary care? A realist review and synthesis.BMC geriatrics · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although doctor-patient communication is essential for drug prescription, the literature reveals deficits in this area. An educational approach at the Cologne medical faculty aims at identifying and addressing those deficits in medical students.Fifth-year medical students first conducted a simulated prescription talk spontaneously. Subsequently, the conversation was discussed with peer students. A pharmacist moderated the discussion based upon a previously developed conversation guide. Afterwards, the same student had the conversation again, but as if for the first time. Conversations were video-recorded, transcribed and subjected to quantitative content analysis. Four days after the simulation, the students who conducted the talk, those who observed and discussed it, and students who did neither, completed a written test that focused on the content of an effective prescription talk.Content analysis revealed clear deficits in spontaneously led prescription talks. Even essential information as on adverse drug reactions were often lacking. Prescription talks became clearly more informative and comprehensive after the short, guided peer discussion. With regard to a comprehensive, informative prescription talk, the written test showed that both the students who conducted the talk and those who only observed it performed clearly better than the students who did not participate in the educational approach.Deficits regarding prescription talks are present in 5
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.