Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37035129›Full record

ReviewPerspectives on medical education2023

Technology Complements Physical Examination and Facilitates Skills Development among Health Sciences Clerkship Students:

J Lees, M Bearman, T Risor, L Sweet

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Perspectives on medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

J LeesDeakin University, AU.ORCID 0000-0003-0026-9432
M BearmanDeakin University, AU.ORCID 0000-0002-6862-9871
T RisorUniversity of Copenhagen, DK.ORCID 0000-0002-2018-528X
L SweetDeakin University, AU.ORCID 0000-0003-0605-1186

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Technology is increasingly present in the clinical environment. There is a dearth of investigation of the relationship between technology and touch concerning student learning of physical examination practices. Method: Integrative review methods were used to synthesise empirical literature to provide a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between physical examination, learning and technology in the context of health professional student clerkships. Results: Three databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL and Eric were searched for all articles published from 2014 to 2021 using terms relating to (i) physical examination, (ii) technology, and (iii) student clerkships. Thirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. From the analysis, it is evident that technologies that intersect with learning of physical examination may broadly be apportioned into two categories: 1) technologies that mediate physical examination practices; and 2) technologies that mediate the learning of physical examination. Conclusions: This review indicates that technologies may have multiple roles in the student learning of physical examination, including technology mediating increased diagnostic accuracy and access to supplementary learning material relating to physical examination that is integrated for the clinical clerkship environment. It highlights a need to further understand the touch versus technology relationship and explore the dynamic intersection.

Indexed as

MedicineStudentsHumansLearningPhysical ExaminationTechnology

Identifiers

PMID37035129
PMCPMC10077975

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.