Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38048132›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Preclerkship Medical Students' Use of Third-Party Learning Resources.

Emily C N Lawrence, C Jessica Dine, Jennifer R Kogan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
9.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emily C N LawrenceMichigan Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
C Jessica DinePerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Jennifer R KoganPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
University of Pennsylvania · USMichigan Medicine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Undergraduate medical education increasingly relies on asynchronous, virtual learning; and medical educators have observed students engaging in self-directed learning outside of their institutional curriculum using widely available third-party resources. If medical educators better understand how students are learning, they may uncover novel opportunities to improve preclerkship education. Objective: To explore how and why preclerkship medical students use third-party learning resources. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study recruited second-year medical students from 7 public and private allopathic US medical schools and conducted 7 virtual focus groups (1 per institution) from September 2022 to January 2023, exploring how and why students use third-party resources. Data were iteratively analyzed in parallel with focus groups using constructivist grounded theory methodology. Data analysis was performed from October 2022 to February 2023. Results: Fifty-eight second-year US medical students who had used a third-party resource at least once participated; 36 (61%) identified as women; 13 (23%) identified as Asian, 6 (11%) as Black, 30 (53%) as White, 6 (11%) as multiracial, and 4 (7%) as other; 6 (10%) identified as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin, and 52 (90%) identified as non-Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin; 48 (83%) were aged 23 to 25 years. Participants described engaging in a cyclical process of deciding whether and how to use third-party resources. Four broad themes were identified: (1) hearing about resources, (2) selecting resources, (3) using resources, and (4) tensions and possible solutions. Participants largely heard about third-party resources from peers and turned to resources out of dissatisfaction with some aspect of their medical school curriculum. Students used resources in various ways that were user-dependent and context-dependent. Participants endorsed multiple benefits over their in-house curricula, particularly efficiency, clarity, and concision. Tensions included navigating resource drawbacks and the perception of an antagonistic relationship between medical schools and third-party resources. Participants suggested that medical schools examine the resources, recommend specific ones, integrate them into the curriculum, and subsidize their cost. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study of preclerkship medical student use of third-party resources, participants perceived that the resources had numerous benefits for learning and suggested that medical schools should more formally acknowledge and integrate their use.

Indexed as

CurriculumEducation, Medical, UndergraduateRacial GroupsSelf-Directed Learning as TopicStudents, MedicalAdultAsianData AnalysisEducation, DistanceFemaleHumansLearningYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38048132
PMCPMC10696480
OpenAlexW4389305194

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.