Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38188409›Full record

ArticleMedical science educator2023

A Case Study of Curriculum Co-creation During a Seminar-Style Course for Senior Medical Students.

Annika C Lee, Holly C Gooding, Hugh A Stoddard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science educator, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Annika C LeeUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Holly C GoodingDepartment of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3145-5791
Hugh A StoddardEmory University School of Medicine, MS-1020-003-1AE, 100 Woodruff Circle, P-378, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7720-0655

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Opportunities to learn about education theory underpinning medical education are limited in both undergraduate and graduate medical education and predominantly focus on "student as teacher." Key components of education theory relevant to medical education, including learning theory, curricular design, and assessment design, are rarely included in student-as-teacher training. Opportunities for medical students to co-create curricula with faculty are scarce. Methods: We present the case study of a month-long, seminar-style course titled, Results: Forty-seven post-clinical students completed the course; 28 completed course evaluations. They strongly agreed that the class met its stated goals (4.89/5) and that faculty teaching (4.93/5) and supervision (4.93/5) were appropriate. Themes from student reflections expressed that the co-creation process was insightful about the profession itself, from the perspective of their own participation in learning how to become a member of the profession. Discussion: This course offered a unique opportunity for medical students to learn medical education beyond the skill of teaching. The course allowed deep immersion into current literature and offered the chance to plan and execute one's own learning.

Indexed as

Case studyCurriculum co-creationFoundational principles of educationSeminar pedagogy

Identifiers

PMID38188409
PMCPMC10766929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.