ArticleAustralasian journal of ultrasound in medicine2020
Push and pull factors impacting the pedagogical approaches used by sonographers to teach scanning skills.
Article in Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence as a teaching tool for gynaecological ultrasound: A systematic search and scoping review.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo report the qualitative findings of the inaugural survey of sonographer skill-teaching practices in Australia using the SonoSTePs tool.
methodA national cross-sectional survey of all qualified sonographers registered with the Australian Sonographer Accreditation Registry. A mix of quantitative and qualitative data was collected. This paper reports on a content analysis of the qualitative data relating to factors that impact on teaching.
resultsA total of 528 respondents provided a range of qualitative data in five extended text questions. Five key themes emerged from the analysis: limited protected teaching time; perceived skill complexity; learner skill level and credentials; avoiding overwhelming the learner; and patient well-being and their willingness to be scanned. Novel teaching interactions between the educator and the student sonographer were identified. Information was provided to learners at four time-points across the continuum of clinical practice performance. The type, quantity and purpose of the information provided by the educator to the learner differed at each of these four time-points and included the following: (i) pre-task clarification, guidance and practice norms; (ii) in-task verbal information and scanning support; (iii) post-task support and information; and (iv) end-task or terminal feedback.
conclusionThis is the first published study which reports the push and pull factors affecting pedagogical approaches to teach and learn complex scanning skills. These results provide a corpus of new knowledge, and the first analysis and review, about the pedagogical findings related to teaching scanning skills for clinical practice. This study provides a basis for further research and practice improvements.
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.