Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34583502›Full record

ArticleJournal of educational evaluation for health professions2021

Definition of character for medical education based on expert opinions in Korea.

Yera Hur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

1 author.

Yera HurInstitute of Medical Education, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis follow-up study focused on 3 overarching questions: what keywords can be extracted from experts’ definitions of character?; what is the operational definition of character for medical students?; and what possible solutions can be suggested to address the issues of character education that were identified in the previous study?

methodsSixty-three medical education experts recruited through expert sampling and 19 non-medical education experts recruited through snowball sampling answered a questionnaire that addressed the 3 major questions of the study. The responses were analyzed for descriptive statistics with supplementary keyword extraction tools, including the Cortical and Monkey keyword extractors.

resultsA total of 93 definitional statements were counted, and 138 keyword terms were extracted. The top 5 keyword terms mentioned by the medical education experts were “patient”, “empathy”, “qualities”, “attitude”, and “ability”. These keyword terms were quite different from those mentioned by the non-medical education experts. Based on the extracted keywords, an operational definition of character education by the medical education expert group was presented as follows: the basic qualities and ability to empathize with patients affected by illness based on respect for patients and others. Various methods were proposed to solve the issue of character education, and many of them pointed to curriculum development, such as improvements in teaching and learning methods and evaluation methods, including role modeling.

conclusionA clear statement of the concept of character education is the start to resolve issues of character education. Character education improvements will be possible at the institutional level according to the above results.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalStudents, MedicalCurriculumFollow-Up StudiesHumansRepublic of KoreaCharacterHumanitiesMedical educationMedical studentProfessionalism

Identifiers

PMID34583502
PMCPMC8577989

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.