ArticleAEM education and training2022
The development, implementation, and evaluation of a medical student peer teaching training curriculum during a high-fidelity prehospital trauma simulation.
Article in AEM education and training, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Erratum.AEM education and training · 2022Article
- The development, implementation, and evaluation of a medical student peer teaching training curriculum during a high-fidelity prehospital trauma simulation.AEM education and training · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum.2022
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: While peer teaching has been found to be an effective technique during simulation, no peer teaching training curriculum (PTTC) has been developed for simulation-based learning. The objective of this study, therefore, was to develop, implement, and evaluate a PTTC during a high-fidelity trauma simulation. Methods: When developing the PTTC, we combined several validated learning models for teaching and learning procedural skills. We then implemented it over 6 days in two phases: instructional (learning how to teach) and experiential (practicing teaching). Our research team conducted a qualitative evaluation to evaluate the effectiveness of the PTTC. We analyzed written self-reflections from 20 second-year medical students who completed the PTTC. Using an iterative inductive approach to data analysis, our research team first individually coded the reflection papers. We then met to define and categorize the codes into themes. Finally, we compared these themes to the PTTC's objectives to evaluate the curriculum's effectiveness. Results: The following themes emerged from the data: 1) learning through teaching; 2) self-actualization as an educator; and 3) role of physician as leader, advocate, and educator. The students described how the peer teaching experience improved their own procedural knowledge and skills. They also reported an increase in their leadership and communication skills as they effectively provided guidance and feedback to their peers, which led to their self-actualization as an educator. This self-actualization inspired the peer teachers' professional identity formation as leaders and educators in medicine. Conclusions: Based on these themes, we found our PTTC to be an effective curricular design. Our results reinforce previously described benefits to both peer teachers and learners in regard to medical knowledge and skills acquisition and furthers the academic emergency medicine community's understanding of how students' involvement as peer teachers in simulation-based education impacts their professional development.
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.