Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36582584›Full record

ReviewCureus2022

Ipsative Assessment and Peer Feedback in an Orthopaedic Junior Doctor Teaching Programme: A Project Plan and Narrative Review of the Literature.

Fitzgerald Anazor

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 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

1 author.

Fitzgerald AnazorTrauma and Orthopaedics, William Harvey Hospital, Ashford, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The main aim of this study is to describe a plan for a project to introduce the use of formative ipsative assessment and peer feedback within an orthopaedic junior doctor teaching programme. These changes will ensure that students demonstrate objective progress and understand that they are making progress in their learning journey. It will also improve learner collaboration through the creation of communities of practice. Key stakeholders involved include the junior doctors, tutors, consultants, medical education department, research/audit department, and orthopaedic company representatives. Outcomes will be measured using a four-point Likert scale on Google forms digital portfolios for the domains of clinical knowledge, technical skills, communication, teamwork, and basic research skills. Progress will be audited at six-month intervals. Full project implementation will be within 6-12 months. A narrative review of relevant literature and theories of learning in relation to ipsative assessment and peer feedback within a clinical teaching context was also performed.  The future of medical education will still contain large components of ipsative assessment. In addition, a problem-based collaborative learning approach is now utilized in many medical schools and peer feedback will become more frequently utilized as a part of this in future. The author looks forward to implementing this project successfully and anticipates that the knowledge/skills gained from this will be useful for any future career projects both within and outside medical education.

Indexed as

clinical teachingipsative assessmentnarrative revieworthopaedicspeer feedbackproject plan

Identifiers

PMID36582584
PMCPMC9795416

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.