Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35734155›Full record

ReviewMethodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal2022

The Science of Learning and Art of Education in Cardiology Fellowship.

Natalie Stokes, Kathryn Berlacher

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Natalie StokesUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3562-7682
Kathryn BerlacherUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, US.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The science of learning, bolstered by the foundational principles of adult learning, has evolved to allow for a more sophisticated understanding of how humans acquire knowledge. To optimize learning outcomes, cardiology educators should be familiar with these concepts and apply them routinely when teaching trainees. This paper presents an overview of the neurobiology of learning and adult learning principles and offers examples of ways in which this science can be applied in cardiology fellowships. Both fellows and educators benefit from the science of learning and its artistic application to education.

Indexed as

CardiologyEducation, MedicalAdultClinical CompetenceEducation, Medical, GraduateFellowships and ScholarshipsHumansLearningadult learningcardiology trainingmedical education

Identifiers

PMID35734155
PMCPMC9165667

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.