ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2023
A pilot clinical skills coaching program to reimagine remediation: a cohort study.
Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Changes to Master Adaptive Learning in the Pre-Clerkship Phase of Medical School.Medical science educator · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background New approaches are needed to improve and destigmatize remediation in undergraduate medical education (UME). The COVID-19 pandemic magnified the need to support struggling learners to ensure competency and readiness for graduate medical education (GME). Clinical skills (CS) coaching is an underutilized approach that may mitigate the stigma of remedial learning. Methods A six-month CS coaching pilot was conducted at Harvard Medical School (HMS) as a destigmatized remedial learning environment for clerkship and post-clerkship students identified as 'at risk' based on objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE). The pilot entailed individual and group coaching with five faculty, direct bedside observation of CS, and standardized patient encounters with video review. Strengths-based coaching principles and appreciative inquiry were emphasized. Results Twenty-three students participated in the pilot: 14 clerkship students (cohort 1) and 9 post-clerkship students (cohort 2). All clerkship students (cohort 1) demonstrated sustained improvement in CS across three OSCEs compared to baseline: at pilot close, at 6-months post pilot, and at 21-24 months post-pilot all currently graduating students (10/10, 100%) passed the summative OSCE, an HMS graduation requirement. All post-clerkship students (cohort 2) passed the HMS graduation OSCE (9/9,100%). Feedback survey results included clerkship students (9/14; 64%) and post-clerkship students (7/9; 78%); all respondents unanimously agreed that individual coaching was "impactful to my clinical learning and practice". Faculty and leadership fully supported the pilot as a destigmatized and effective approach to remediation. Conclusion Remediation has an essential and growing role in medical schools. CS coaching for remedial learning can reduce stigma, foster a growth mindset, and support sustained progress for 'at risk' early clerkship through final year students. An "implementation template" with suggested tools and timelines can be locally adapted to guide CS coaching for UME remediation. The CS coaching pilot model is feasible and can be generalized to many UME programs.
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.