Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35101016›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical education2022

Effectiveness of non-bedside teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: a quasi-experimental study.

Henrik Heitmann, Philipp Wagner, Elisabeth Fischer, Martin Gartmeier, Friederike Schmidt-Graf

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors.

Henrik HeitmannDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany. henrik.heitmann@tum.de.
Philipp WagnerDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.
Elisabeth FischerDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.
Martin GartmeierTUM Medical Education Center, School of Medicine, TUM, Munich, Germany.
Friederike Schmidt-GrafDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic poses a huge challenge for clinical teaching due to contact restrictions and social distancing. Medical teachers have to balance potential risks and benefits of bedside teaching, especially in course formats intended to foster practical clinical skills. In this context, we aimed to address the question, whether presence-based teaching formats without patient involvement are suitable to teach practical skills.

methodsIn this quasi-experimental study, presence-based teaching formats with and without patient contact were retrospectively compared regarding their effects on medical students' theoretical knowledge and practical skills, i.e. the performance and clinical interpretation of the neurological exam. To this end, evaluations from 102 students and their lecturers participating in a neurological bedside teaching course at a German university hospital between October 2020 and April 2021 were obtained. Students were initially randomly assigned to course dates. However, 53 students assigned to courses in November and December 2020, were not able to go bedside due to contact restrictions. These students formed the interventional group and the remaining 49 students the control group. The primary outcome measures were students' overall grading of the course (school grades, 1-6) as well as ratings of knowledge and skills provided by the students themselves and their lecturers on a numerical rating scale (0-10). Comparison between groups was performed using frequentist and Bayesian t-statistics.

resultsThe teaching format without patient contact received a significantly poorer overall grade by the students (p = 0.018). However, improvements in the students' self-ratings of knowledge and skills did not differ between the two formats (all p > 0.05, BF

conclusionsTeaching formats without patient contact are less well-received by the students. However, they are able to teach practical skills regarding the performance and clinical interpretation of examination techniques. Still, the evaluations obtained might not adequately capture the importance of bedside teaching in preparing future physicians for their practice. Perspectively, hybrid teaching approaches including flipped-classroom concepts hold considerable potential to enhance effectiveness of bedside teaching in the present pandemic situation and in the future.

Indexed as

COVID-19Education, Medical, UndergraduateBayes TheoremHumansPandemicsRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2Clinical CompetenceCOVID-19NeurologyTeaching

Identifiers

PMID35101016
PMCPMC8801559

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.