ArticleGMS journal for medical education2022
The sudden switch to online communication training after 10 years in the classroom - comparing the evaluation results of a course on doctor-patient communication.
Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Needs and Constraints for Cardiac Rehabilitation Among Patients with Coronary Heart Disease Within a Community-Based Setting: A Study Based on Focus Group Interviews.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Medical students in their first consultation: A comparison between a simulated face-to-face and telehealth consultation to train medical consultation skills.GMS journal for medical education · 2023Article
- Taking responsibility.GMS journal for medical education · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of the study was to find out whether it is possible to successfully convert a communication course for around 400 students to a blended-learning format (asynchronous theoretical course/synchronous digital practical course). The main focus thereby was on assessing subjective learning progress and the extent to which the importance of communication and doctor-patient communication can be conveyed online. The study is based on the results of an evaluation of the opinions of both the students and the lecturers that participated in the course. Methods: The students, who were in their fourth preclinical semester in 2020, were asked to fill in a self-assessment sheet at the beginning of the course, and following its completion. The feedback provided by the lecturers was also assessed. In order to compare the results and identify possible discrepancies, the corresponding self-assessment and evaluation results for the past 10 years (stemming from traditional classroom courses) were also taken into account. Results: Participants in the online courses reported distinct subjective learning progress, and greater progress than was reported for traditional courses in previous years. The suitability of the online format was viewed critically by both students and lecturers, while the course atmosphere was seen positively. The relevance of doctor-patient communication was assessed particularly highly in the online format. Conclusion: Based on the results of the evaluation, the experience gained from the blended-learning format will be included into future iterations of the communication course at Goethe University Frankfurt. The results have shown that doctor-patient communication can be learned well online. This format can therefore be recommended for new learning concepts in the future.
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.