Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35652071›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2022

Medical Humanities Education and Its Influence on Students' Outcomes in Taiwan: A Systematic Review.

Bao Lan Hoang, Lynn Valerie Monrouxe, Kuo-Su Chen, Shu-Ching Chang, Neville Chiavaroli, Yosika Septi Mauludina, Chien-Da Huang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 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. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors.

Bao Lan HoangChang Gung Medical Education Research Centre (CG-MERC), Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Taiwan.
Lynn Valerie MonrouxeFaculty of Medicine and Health, Susan Wakil Health Building, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kuo-Su ChenChang Gung Medical Education Research Centre (CG-MERC), Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Taiwan.
Shu-Ching ChangDepartment of Medical Humanities and Social Sciences, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Neville ChiavaroliAustralian Council for Educational Research, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Yosika Septi MauludinaChang Gung Medical Education Research Centre (CG-MERC), Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Taiwan.
Chien-Da HuangChang Gung Medical Education Research Centre (CG-MERC), Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Medical education has emphasized the importance of integrating medical humanities training into the curriculum to benefit medical and nursing students' future practice, featuring in the list of national funding priorities for healthcare education research in Taiwan for many years. However, the extent to which this drive has resulted in medical humanities training, what rationales underpin its inclusion, and its efficacy is largely unknown. This study aims to address these issues across medical humanities programs within the Taiwanese context. Methods: We conducted a systematic review. Inclusion criteria included studies in English or Mandarin reporting outcomes of medical humanities courses in healthcare education settings in Taiwan between 2000 and 2019. We searched across five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, ERIC, PsycInfo, Web of Science), following PRISMA guidelines. The Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) Global Scale and Kirkpatrick Levels are used for identifying the strength of evidence. Results: 17 articles were extracted from the 134 identified. Intrinsic and instrumental rationales for the inclusion of medical humanities education were common, compared with epistemological-based and critical-based approaches. Several positive impacts were identified in relation to participation including modification of attitudes, knowledge, and skills. However, the highest level (i.e., unequivocal) of evidence characterized by effects on students' behaviors or ongoing interaction with colleagues and patients is lacking. Conclusion: Findings suggest that although medical humanities education is widely implemented in Taiwan, no clear consensus has been reached regarding the rationale for inclusion or how it is localized from Western to Asian contexts. Future research still needs to explore the long-term impact of medical humanities education for medical and nursing students and its impact on patient care. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier: CRD42019123967.

Indexed as

curriculummedical educationmedical humanitiesmedical studentsnursing studentssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35652071
PMCPMC9150274

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.