ArticleCanadian medical education journal2023
Teaching peer reviewing to medical students through authentic peer reviews: how to build the next generation of scholars.
Article in Canadian medical education journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Supporting medical physics resident development through mentored journal peer review experiences.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Medical Education Strategies for Otolaryngology in the Online World and the Role of Podcasting.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- The overcrowded curriculum is alarming.Canadian medical education journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Implication Statement: The peer review process is a critical step in producing sound scientific literature, traditionally conducted by professionals well-established in their field. It is uncommon for students, even at the graduate level, to contribute. Faculty created a novel course in which 18 medical students (nine per year) delivered peer reviews to the Énoncé des implications de la recherche: L'évaluation par les pairs est une étape essentielle de la production d'une littérature scientifique de bonne qualité. Traditionnellement faite par des professionnels confirmés dans leur domaine de compétences, il est rare que les étudiants, même ceux des cycles supérieurs, participent aux comités de lecture. Un cours novateur a permis à 18 étudiants en médecine (9 par année) de réaliser des évaluations par les pairs pour la
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.