ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Assessing the Use of Microlearning for Preceptor Development.
Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A survey of health professions learners' attitudes towards social media in medical education: a substance use disorders education case study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Video-based microlearning improves vascular surgery resident proficiency in end-to-side anastomosis.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2025Article
- The MIND model a microlearning AI-integrated instructional design for enhanced learning outcomes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Microlearning beyond boundaries: A systematic review and a novel framework for improving learning outcomes.Heliyon · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate microlearning as a preceptor development method compared to a traditional method of learning. Twenty-five preceptor participants volunteered to engage in a learning intervention about two preceptor development topics. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either a thirty-minute traditional learning experience or a fifteen-minute microlearning experience; participants then crossed over to the other intervention for comparison. Primary outcomes were satisfaction, changes in knowledge, self-efficacy, and perception of behavior, confidence scale, and self-reported frequency of behavior, respectively. One-way repeated measures ANOVA and Wilcoxon paired t-tests were used to analyze knowledge and self-efficacy, and Wilcoxon paired t-tests were utilized to assess satisfaction and perception of behavior. Most participants preferred microlearning over the traditional method (72% vs. 20%,
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.