ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2017
Highlighting common pitfalls to avoid when writing the medical education manuscript.
Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Creating a 'Community of Inquiry': A Framework for Optimizing the Virtual Education Experience.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2021Article
- Twelve Tips for Creating an All-Day Writing Retreat for Health Profession Educators: An Immersive, Product-Oriented Learning Experience.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2019Article
- Developing a Writing Workshop for Clinician-Educators: A Synergistic Integration of Ethics, Rhetoric and Education Theories, and Social Science.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2017Article
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
This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Medical educators have an unprecedented opportunity to advance the field through dissemination of their work in academic publications. Also, their advancement may depend heavily on the number of publications. However, writing is, for many medical educators, a daunting task. Fortunately, authors have provided valuable articles and tips on the "how-to" of writing, and faculty development workshops have provided venues during which one can write a basic paper. These all are valuable, but they do not cover some of the unforeseen potential problems associated with publishing. Hence, we offer common pitfalls that the unsuspecting author will want to avoid, grouped into four categories--ethics of publishing, aims of discourse, setting boundaries, and accountability--in a reflective framework that most educators will recognize. These highlights should better equip novice medical educators, provide insights for experienced medical education mentors, and enhance the likelihood that the scholarly work will be published.
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.