ArticleIntegrative medicine research2022
Assessment of clinical competency among TCM medical students using standardized patients of traditional Chinese medicine: A 5-year prospective randomized study.
Article in Integrative medicine research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Faculty standardized patients versus traditional teaching method to improve clinical competence among traditional Chinese medicine students: a prospective randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2024Trial
- Virtual Standardized Patients Versus Traditional Academic Training for Improving Clinical Competence Among Traditional Chinese Medicine Students: Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Trial
- Student standardized patients versus occupational standardized patients for improving clinical competency among TCM medical students: a 3-year prospective randomized study.BMC medical education · 2023Trial
- Impact of a combined case-based and evidence-based medicine teaching approach in traditional Chinese orthopedic residency training: a single-center, retrospective educational study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSome Western medicine schools in China established standardized patient (SP) programs for medical education. However, SP programs are rarely applied to the education of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of using standardized patient traditional Chinese medicine (SP-TCM) to improve clinical competency among TCM medical students.
methodsThis study was a prospective, 2-group, parallel-training randomized trial over the course of 5 years. Data were collected from September 2016 to December 2020. Participants in each year were randomly allocated into the traditional-method training group or the SP-TCM training group (1:1) for a 3-month curriculum. Measurement of clinical competency among all trainees was based on a standardized examination composed of scores of medical record documentation, scores of TCM syndrome differentiation and therapeutic regimen, and checklist assessment from both SP-TCMs and TCM professionals. Feedback was collected using semi-constructive questionnaires from both groups.
resultsCompared with those assigned to traditional-method training, those assigned to SP-TCM training demonstrated significantly greater post-training improvement in medical record documentation and TCM syndrome differentiation and therapeutic regimen. Moreover, SP-TCM trainees outscored those assigned to traditional training in the assessment for encounter performance given by independent SP-TCMs and TCM professionals. The SP-TCM method gained higher satisfaction of training efficacy and test performance than the traditional method.
conclusionThis SP-TCM program demonstrated great benefits for improving clinical competency among TCM medical students.
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.