Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38073800›Full record

ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2020

From Spark to Flame -- Radical Innovations from Cataclysmic Events in Medical Education.

Jessica Foulds, Martha Burkle, Lyn K Sonnenberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Jessica FouldsUniversity of Alberta.
Martha BurkleUniversity of Alberta.
Lyn K SonnenbergUniversity of Alberta.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. We all knew it was coming. We just didn't realize it would all come at once. No, we are not talking about the zombie apocalypse, but rather the emergence of virtual teaching and virtual healthcare delivery pervading every aspect of life as we now know it. In the context of COVID-19 and marked shifts in how and where we teach medical learners, the staggering number of new ideas, adaptations, and innovations has been inspiring. This game-changing pandemic is a spark, a lightning bolt if you will, that has created solutions, where previous barriers may have been in virtual teaching and healthcare provision. It is impossible to even consider going "back to normal", as they say. We believe the torrent of ideas and possibilities for medical education, brought by COVID-19, cannot and should not be stopped. We explore the nuances of virtual teaching and virtual care and seek readers to consider what their actionable frameshift can mean for medical education in their teaching realm moving forward. We believe that this is the time to innovate: the time to radically change our traditional medical education practices. To sustain these innovations, institutional support, participant buy-in, and assessment and outcome data will be invaluable to harness these new opportunities.

Indexed as

Clinical teachingCOVID-19Educational TechnologyHealth Professions EducationLMS (learning management system)Medical educationPostgraduate medical educationUndergraduate medical educationVirtual learning

Identifiers

PMID38073800
PMCPMC10702677

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.