ArticleCureus2021
Development of Clinical Skills and Confidence Questionnaire for Triage and Action Minor Emergency Course: Test-Retest Exam.
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.
- Efficacy of Group O Washed Red Blood Cell Transfusion on Vital Signs and Hematologic Stability in Trauma Patients With Different Blood Types.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Onlinization of a simulation course that includes minor emergency procedures.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe Triage and Action (T&A) minor emergency course was developed to improve the clinical skills of Japanese non-specialist physicians for minor emergent problems. Currently, the course quality is evaluated only by a self-reported satisfaction questionnaire. This study described a new clinical skills and confidence questionnaire to evaluate its validity and reliability.
methodsThe web-based questionnaire was evaluated by 103 physicians identified from a mailing list as having taken the T&A minor emergency course. The clinical experience and confidence (CEC) questionnaire was prepared, and its content and contextual validity were validated using a clinical sensibility test (CST). Reliability was assessed by the interclass correlation coefficient after two weeks via a follow-up CEC questionnaire.
resultsOf the 103 physicians contacted 44 (42.7%) responded to the questionnaire, 36 (40.8%) to the follow-up CEC questionnaire, and 33 (32.0%) to both questionnaires; 28 (27.2%) participants took the clinical sensibility test. Five questions which asked the total number of patients treated within six months showed fair agreement on the reliability test. All answers to the questions in the CST were favorable.
conclusionWe removed every question which asked the total number of patients treated for various minor emergencies within six months from CEC. Consequently, the new questionnaire was shown to be contextually well validated and reliable. We will use the CEC questionnaire to improve our course, which we hope to demonstrate improved primary care for selected minor conditions.
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.