Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37791168›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

The Utility of the Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Evaluating the Readability, Feasibility, and Acceptability of Mini-CEX Utilization.

Hany A Zaki, Yavuz Yigit, Eman Shaban, Ahmed E Shaban, Amr Elmoheen, Khalid Bashir, Kaleem Basharat, Mohamed Ali, Baha Hamdi Alkahlout

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
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.

Hany A ZakiEmergency Medicine, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, QAT.
Yavuz YigitBlizard Institute, Queen Mary University, London, GBR.
Eman ShabanCardiology, Al Jufairi Diagnosis and Treatment, Doha, QAT.
Ahmed E ShabanInternal Medicine, Mansoura General Hospital, Mansoura, EGY.
Amr ElmoheenEmergency Medicine, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, QAT.
Khalid BashirMedicine, Qatar University, Doha, QAT.
Kaleem BasharatEmergency Medicine, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, QAT.
Mohamed AliEmergency Medicine, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, QAT.
Baha Hamdi AlkahloutEmergency Medicine, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, QAT.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessment tools, such as the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX), have been developed to evaluate the competence of medical trainees during routine duties. However, their effectiveness in busy environments, such as the emergency department (ED), is poorly understood. This study assesses the feasibility, reliability, and acceptability of implementing the mini-CEX in the ED. PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were scoured for observational and randomized trials related to our topic. Moreover, a manual search was also conducted to identify additional studies. After the literature search, data were extracted from studies that were eligible for inclusion by two independent reviewers. When applicable, meta-analyses were performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. In addition, the methodological quality of studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Of the 2,105 articles gathered through database and manual searches, only four met the criteria for inclusion in the review. A combined analysis of three studies revealed that trainee-patient interactions averaged 16.05 minutes (95% CI = 14.21-17.88), and feedback was given in about 10.78 minutes (95% CI = 10.19-11.38). The completion rates for mini-CEX were high: 95.7% (95% CI = 87.6-98.6) for medical trainees and 95.8% (95% CI = 89.7-98.3) for assessors. Satisfaction with mini-CEX was notable, with 63.5% (95% CI = 51.5-74.1) of medical trainees and 75.7% (95% CI = 63.9-84.6) of assessors expressing contentment. Qualitative data from one study demonstrated that 70.6% of faculty members could allocate suitable time for mini-CEX during their clinical shifts. The mini-CEX is a feasible and acceptable assessment tool within the ED. Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that it might be reliable.

Indexed as

acceptabilityemergency departmentfeasibilitymini-cexmini-clinical evaluation exercisemini-clinical examinationmini-evaluation exercisemodified mini-cexreliabilitysatisfaction

Identifiers

PMID37791168
PMCPMC10544045

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.