ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2021
Improvement plan for professionalism course guidance based on adult learning theory.
Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Professionalism is widely known as extremely important to the practice of medicine. However, a methodology has not been established in Japan, such that teachers-in-charge at medical schools are using personal strategies in conducting classes. Evidently, research on professionalism education in Japan is lacking. Therefore, the study aims to report an improvement plan for professionalism education in a certain medical school in Japan with emphasis on practice. Specifically, the study focuses on problem extraction and targets medical students in the first year. The problems of the program were extracted for learner, grouping, facilitator, and presentation. Program improvements were implemented for each of these parts to overcome the problems. The result shows that students gained a better understanding of their roles until graduation. In addition, the number of students who answered that this program was the most memorable in 2019 has tripled compared with that in 2018. Regarding the program improvement, the effect of the program cannot be concluded based on this result alone. In the future, these students should be followed up to investigate any changes. In addition, feedback from each facilitator should be investigated as a future endeavor.
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.