Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35174763›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2022

Self-efficacy and confidence of medical students with prior scribing experience: A mixed methods study.

Elizabeth M McCarthy, Richard Feinn, Listy A Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Elizabeth M McCarthyFrank H. Netter Md School of Medicine, Hamden.ORCID 0000-0001-7358-8907
Richard FeinnFrank H. Netter Md School of Medicine, Hamden.
Listy A ThomasFrank H. Netter Md School of Medicine, Hamden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMedical scribing is an increasingly common way for pre-medical students to gain clinical experience. Scribes are a valuable part of the healthcare team and have high rates of matriculation into health professional programs. Little is known about the effects of scribing on the success of the student. This manuscript aims to determine the effect of scribing experience on clinical self-efficacy during medical school. PARTICIPANTS AND

methodsPerceived clinical self-efficacy was evaluated with validated survey questions using a 5-point Likert-type scale as well as free text responses. The survey was completed by 175 medical students at the Frank H. Netter, MD School of Medicine. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS. As part of the mixed methods study, free text responses were analyzed using thematic analysis.

resultsQuantitative results showed no statistical difference in perceived clinical self-efficacy between medical students with scribing experience and those without. Analysis of free text responses showed that medical students believed their scribing experience improved comfort in the clinical setting and increased familiarity with medical terminology. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsMedical students with scribing experience did not demonstrate greater clinical self-efficacy than their peers without scribing experience. However, medical students with scribing experience have a perceived value of their pre-medical scribing experience on their success in medical school.

Indexed as

Students, MedicalHumansSchools, MedicalSelf EfficacySurveys and Questionnairesclinical self confidenceclinical self-efficacymedical school admissionsMedical scribemedical studentpre-medical

Identifiers

PMID35174763
PMCPMC8856037

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.