ArticleGMS journal for medical education2023
From summative MAAS Global to formative MAAS 2.0 - a workshop report.
Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- The Effectiveness of Small Group Education on Improving Antibiotic Prescribing in General Practice: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence Supporting the Training of Communication Skills in the Education of Health Care Professions: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The MAAS Global ( Method: The revised version of the MAAS 2.0 assessment sheet was translated into German with the authors' permission. Open questions were discussed with the revision process project manager. Results: The revision was carried out with a view to focusing on the patient's frame of reference, removing ambiguities identified previously while using MAAS Global, and closer alignment with the underlying Calgary-Cambridge model. Furthermore, the scale used for the evaluation was modified and now uses a formative evaluation range without grade-related classification. Conclusion: With the content reorientation of MAAS Global to MAAS 2.0, and the associated focus on frame of reference, context, the formative, the revision presented here sets new priorities for future evaluations in the context of under- and postgraduate medical education and the assessment of medical patient communication in general.
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.