Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37559003›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

An assessment of the simulated performance of basic clinical procedures by junior doctors during the first year of clinical practice.

Paul O'Connor, Ambyr Reid, Orla Mongan, Cara Egan, Bronwyn Reid-McDermott, Philip Parackal Augusthinose, Michael Smith, Ruth Cooney, Dara Byrne

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Paul O'ConnorDepartment of General Practice, School of Medicine, University of Galway, 1 Distillery Road, Newcastle, Co Galway, Galway, H91 TK33, Ireland. paul.oconnor@universityofgalway.ie.
Ambyr ReidIrish Centre for Applied Patient Safety and Simulation, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Orla MonganIrish Centre for Applied Patient Safety and Simulation, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Cara EganIrish Centre for Applied Patient Safety and Simulation, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Bronwyn Reid-McDermottIrish Centre for Applied Patient Safety and Simulation, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Philip Parackal AugusthinoseIrish Centre for Applied Patient Safety and Simulation, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Michael SmithIrish Centre for Applied Patient Safety and Simulation, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Ruth CooneyIrish Centre for Applied Patient Safety and Simulation, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Dara ByrneIrish Centre for Applied Patient Safety and Simulation, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IE

Funding

Irish Health Services Executive (HSE) National Doctor Training and Planning (NDTP) N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUpon entering the healthcare system, junior doctors may lack the skills required to care for patients, and feel unprepared for their role, with considerable variation in the level of proficiency in the performance of particular clinical procedures.

objectiveTo compare the performance and proficiency (self-report and observed) of the performance of nine basic clinical procedures.

methodsSeventeen interns were observed performing nine clinical procedures in a simulated setting in June 2021 (Assessment 1) and January 2022 (Assessment 2). The observers identified whether each step in the procedure was performed correctly, and provided an overall assessment of proficiency. The participants also rated their own level proficiency.

resultsAt Assessment 1 the number of steps performed correctly ranged from a mean of 41.9-83.5%. At Assessment 2 the number of steps performed correctly ranged from a mean of 41.9-97.8%. The most common median proficiency rating for Assessment 1 was 'close supervision', and was 'indirect supervision' at Assessment 2. There was a significant and large effect size in the improvement in performance from Assessment 1 to Assessment 2. Low correlations were found between observer and self-reported proficiency in performance of the procedures.

conclusionsThe large improvement in performance across the two assessments is encouraging. However, there is a need to address the variability in performance on graduation from medical school, and to ensure that any assessment of proficiency is not only reliant on self-report.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceEmotionsHumansMedical Staff, HospitalSelf ReportClinical proceduresConfidenceJunior doctorsProficiency

Identifiers

PMID37559003
PMCPMC10413605
OpenAlexW4385698295

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.