Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35734152›Full record

ReviewMethodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal2022

Consume, Contribute, and Create: Succeeding as a Learner and Educator in the Digital Era.

Gurleen Kaur, Daniel Ambinder, Amit Goyal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal, 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. Review
  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.

Gurleen KaurBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3693-7722
Daniel AmbinderJohns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5875-4214
Amit GoyalCleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5427-7852

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

From medical student to professorship, the practice of medicine requires lifelong learning. The unforgivingly rapid expansion of medical literature often renders traditional educational resources quickly outdated if not altogether obsolete. Conversely, increasingly popular digital platforms are easily accessible and quickly updated, offering vital adjuncts to traditional resources for the modern student. Further, platforms such as podcasts and social media may be particularly well suited for adult learners who tend to be problem centered, self-directed, internally motivated, and time constrained. Social media empowers all participants, thereby blurring the boundaries between learners and educators. Here we review novel digital educational platforms, discussing both potential benefits and pitfalls, and then provide a three-pillared approach-consume, contribute, and create-to help the modern medical professional harness the potential of both traditional and novel resources to succeed as both a learner and educator.

Indexed as

Social MediaAdultHumansadult learning theorymedical educationpodcastssocial mediatweetorials

Identifiers

PMID35734152
PMCPMC9165679

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.