Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36119150›Full record

ArticleGMS journal for medical education2022

Online medical history taking course: Opportunities and limitations in comparison to traditional bedside teaching.

Silvan Lange, Nils Krüger, Maximilian Warm, Mark Op den Winkel, Johanna Buechel, Johanna Huber, Orsolya Genzel-Boroviczény, Martin R Fischer, Konstantinos Dimitriadis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors.

Silvan LangeUniversity Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Institute of Medical Education, Munich, Germany.
Nils KrügerUniversity Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Institute of Medical Education, Munich, Germany.
Maximilian WarmUniversity Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Institute of Medical Education, Munich, Germany.
Mark Op den WinkelUniversity Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Department of Internal Medicine II, Munich, Germany.
Johanna BuechelUniversity Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Munich, Germany.
Johanna HuberUniversity Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Institute of Medical Education, Munich, Germany.
Orsolya Genzel-BoroviczényUniversity Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Dr. von Hauner Children's Hospital, Division of Neonatology Campus Innenstadt, Munich, Germany.
Martin R FischerUniversity Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Institute of Medical Education, Munich, Germany.
Konstantinos DimitriadisUniversity Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Institute of Medical Education, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Obtaining a systematic medical history (MH) from a patient is a core competency in medical education and plays a vital role in the diagnosis of diseases. At the Faculty of Medicine at LMU Munich, students have their first course in MH taking during their second year. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the traditional bedside MH taking course had to be transformed into an online course (OC). Our objectives were to implement an online MH taking course, to evaluate its feasibility and to compare the evaluation results to a historic cohort that had undertaken the traditional bedside teaching course (BTC). Methods: 874 second-year students participated in the OC (BTC=827). After teaching the theoretical background via asynchronous online lectures, students participated in a practical exercise with fellow students using the video communication platform Zoom where they were able to practice taking a MH on the basis of fictitious, text-based patient cases. Students were then asked to evaluate the course through a standardized online survey with 31 questions on teaching quality and self-perceived learning success, which had also been used in previous years. The survey results were compared to the results of the historic cohort using the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: A total of n=162 students (18.5%) evaluated the OC. In the historic cohort, n=252 (30.5%) completed the survey. 85.3% of the OC respondents thought that the atmosphere during the practical exercise was productive and 83.0% greatly appreciated the flexibility in terms of time management. Moreover, they appreciated the online resources as well as having the opportunity to undertake a MH taking course during the COVID-19 pandemic. 27.7% of the respondents thought that traditional BTCs should be supplemented through more online activities in the future. With respect to the ability of independently taking a MH upon completion of the course, the OC was rated significantly lower relative to the BTC (mean OC=2.4, SD=±1.1 vs. mean BTC=1.9, SD=±1.1 (1=strongly agree; 5=strongly disagree); p<0.0001). Conclusion: OCs are a feasible format and seem to convey the theory and practical implementation in a peer-exercise format of MH taking to medical students. The theoretical background can be acquired with great flexibility. Nevertheless, the students' self-appraisal suggested that the traditional teaching format was more effective at teaching MH taking skills. Thus, we propose a blended learning concept, combining elements of both formats. In this context, we suggest prospective, randomized trials to evaluate blended learning approaches.

Indexed as

COVID-19HumansLearningMedical History TakingPandemicsProspective StudiescommunicationCOVID-19distance educationmedical history takingonline teachingonline trainingundergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID36119150
PMCPMC9469571

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.