Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34981565›Full record

ArticleMedical education2022

Patient involvement in assessment of postgraduate medical learners: A scoping review.

Roy Khalife, Manika Gupta, Carol Gonsalves, Yoon Soo Park, Janet Riddle, Ara Tekian, Tanya Horsley

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Public participation in healthcare students' education: An umbrella review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Patient references in the 2005 and 2015 CanMEDS frameworks.Canadian medical education journal · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Roy KhalifeDepartment of Medicine (Hematology), The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3401-4086
Manika GuptaDepartment of Medicine (Hematology), The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Carol GonsalvesDepartment of Medicine (Hematology), The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Yoon Soo ParkMassachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8583-4335
Janet RiddleDepartment of Medical Education, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Ara TekianDepartment of Medical Education, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9252-1588
Tanya HorsleyResearch Unit, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1256-9582
University of Ottawa · CAIllinois College · USHarvard University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextCompetency-based assessment of learners may benefit from a more holistic, inclusive, approach for determining readiness for unsupervised practice. However, despite movements towards greater patient partnership in health care generally, inclusion of patients in postgraduate medical learners' assessment is largely absent.

methodsWe conducted a scoping review to map the nature, extent and range of literature examining the inclusion (or exclusion) of patients within the assessment of postgraduate medical learners. Guided by Arskey and O'Malley's framework and informed by Levac et al. and Thomas et al., we searched two databases (MEDLINE® and Embase®) from inception until February 2021 using subheadings related to assessment, patients and postgraduate learners. Data analysis examined characteristics regarding the nature and factor influencing patient involvement in assessment.

resultsWe identified 41 papers spanning four decades. Some literature suggests patients are willing to be engaged in assessment, however choose not to engage when, for example, language barriers may exist. When stratified by specialty or clinical setting, the influence of factors such as gender, race, ethnicity or medical condition seems to remain consistent. Patients may participate in assessment as a stand-alone group or part of a multi-source feedback process. Patients generally provided high ratings but commented on the observed professional behaviours and communication skills in comparison with physicians who focused on medical expertise.

conclusionFactors that influence patient involvement in assessment are multifactorial including patients' willingness themselves, language and reading-comprehension challenges and available resources for training programmes to facilitate the integration of patient assessments. These barriers however are not insurmountable. While understudied, research examining patient involvement in assessment is increasing; however, our review suggests that the extent which the unique insights will be taken up in postgraduate medical education may be dependent on assessment systems readiness and, in particular, physician readiness to partner with patients in this way.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalMedicineHumansPatient Participation

Identifiers

PMID34981565
OpenAlexW4206284268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.