Trial reportBMC medical education2023
Conflict resolution styles and skills and variation among medical students.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contributions of Clinical Simulation to Group Cohesion: A Quasi-Experimental Study.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional study of conflict-handling modes among first-year veterinary students.Veterinary record open · 2025Article
- Strategies for Resolving Conflict Among Residents in Urology.Current urology reports · 2025Review
- Factors influencing constructive conflict management style of nursing interns: a structural equation modeling approach based on the self-determination theory.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Article
- Unveiling Intraprofessional Dynamics: Learning Teamwork in Acute Care Consultations Between Paediatric and General Practice Residents.Perspectives on medical education · 2025Article
- Article
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
Abstract
backgroundConflict is inevitable on healthcare teams, yet few professional school curricula teach or assess conflict resolution skills. Little is known about the variation in conflict resolution styles across medical students and how these styles might impact conflict resolution skills.
methodsThis is a prospective, single blinded, group randomized quasi experimental trial to assess the impact of knowing one's own conflict resolution style on conflict resolution skills in a simulated encounter. Graduating medical students completed a mandatory conflict resolution session with standardized patients acting as nurses during a transition to residency course. Coaches reviewed videotapes of the simulation, focusing on students' skills with negotiation and emotional intelligence. Retrospectively, we assessed the impact of the students knowing their conflict resolution style prior to simulation, student gender, race, and intended field of practice on conflict resolution skills as judged by coaches.
resultsOne hundred and eight students completed the simulated conflict session. Sixty-seven students completed the TKI before the simulated patient (SP) encounter and 41 after. The most common conflict resolution style was accommodating (n = 40). Knowing one's conflict resolution style in advance of the simulation and one's identified race/ethnicity did not impact skill as assessed by faculty coaches. Students pursuing diagnosis-based specialties had higher negotiation (p = 0.04) and emotional quotient (p = 0.006) scores than those pursuing procedural specialties. Females had higher emotional quotient scores (p = 0.02).
conclusionsConflict resolution styles vary among medical students. Male gender and future practice in a procedural specialty impacted conflict resolution skills but knowing conflict resolution style did not.
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.