ArticleJournal of CME2023
Including Patient Voices in Continuing Medical Education: One Provider's Experience.
Article in Journal of CME, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Integrating Patients' Perspectives into Continuing Medical Education (CME) to Address Disparities in Gynecologic Cancer Care".Journal of CME · 2026Article
- Exploring the Integration of Patient Perspectives in Surgeon Education: Awareness, Engagement and Barriers to Implementation.Journal of CME · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2021, UpToDate began offering continuing medical education (CME) planned and delivered by patients. The patient-authored medical topic reviews focus on lessons learned from interactions with the healthcare system and emphasise quality of life for those living with specific conditions. Having access to the patient voice at the point of care provides clinicians with a perspective that can improve patient-provider communication and promote shared decision-making. Participants who viewed the patient-authored topics were emailed a survey about the content; several responses indicated that the new topics were useful in clinical practice. While positive responses demonstrate that clinicians value the patient perspective, we also received replies from participants and from the patient authors themselves indicating there is more work to be done in developing patient-led CME. As more patients are invited to join the conversation, their expertise will be increasingly recognised as integral to CME.
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.