Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36811671›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2023

Does formative assessment help students to acquire prescribing skills?

L S Kalfsvel, L E J Peeters, K Hoek, C Bethlehem, I H van der Sijs, P H M van der Kuy, W W van den Broek, J Versmissen, F van Rosse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2023. 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. Trial
  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.

L S KalfsvelErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Hospital Pharmacy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. l.kalfsvel@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1545-7623
L E J PeetersErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Hospital Pharmacy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
K HoekErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Hospital Pharmacy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
C BethlehemErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Hospital Pharmacy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6892-2779
I H van der SijsErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Hospital Pharmacy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1744-0999
P H M van der KuyErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Hospital Pharmacy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7128-8801
W W van den BroekErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Institute of Medical Education Research Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3215-5640
J VersmissenErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Hospital Pharmacy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0674-7765
F van RosseErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Hospital Pharmacy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6194-3964

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFormative assessments can help motivate students and ease students' learning through feedback. There is a pressing need for improvement of clinical pharmacotherapy (CPT) education since junior doctors make many prescribing errors. The aim of this study was to determine whether a formative assessment with personalized narrative feedback helps medical students to increase their prescribing skills.

methodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted among masters' medical students at Erasmus Medical Centre, The Netherlands. Students made a formative and a summative skill-based prescription assessment, both during clerkships as part of their regular curriculum. Errors in both assessments were categorized by type and possible consequence and compared with each other.

resultsA total of 388 students made 1964 errors in the formative assessment and 1016 in the summative assessment. Most improvements after the formative assessment were seen for mentioning the weight of a child on the prescription (n = 242, 19%). Most new and repeated errors in the summative assessment were missing usage instructions (n = 82, 16% and n = 121, 41%).

conclusionsThis formative assessment with personalized and individual narrative feedback has helped students to increase the technical correctness of their prescriptions. However, errors repeated after the feedback were predominantly errors showing that only one formative assessment has not yet enhanced the clinical prescribing enough.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalChildClinical CompetenceCurriculumEducational MeasurementFeedbackHumansRetrospective StudiesEducationFormative assessmentMedical educationMedical studentPharmacotherapyPrescribing

Identifiers

PMID36811671
PMCPMC9945830

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.