ArticleMedical education online2024
Evaluating the domains of generalism and equity, diversity and inclusion in preclinical simulated cases for targeted curricular improvements.
Article in Medical education online, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Enhancing diversity in medical education: Bridging gaps and building inclusive curricula.Medical education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSimulated cases are widely used in medical education to develop clinical reasoning skills and discuss key topics around patient care. Such cases present an opportunity to demonstrate real world encounters with diverse patient and health provider identities, impacts of social and structural determinants of health, and demonstrate a generalist approach to problems. However, despite many calls-to-action for medical schools to better incorporate equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) and generalism, it remains difficult to evaluate how well these goals are being met.
methodsA quality improvement project was completed at a single medical school to evaluate the domains of generalism and EDI within simulated cases used in the preclinical curriculum. Generalism was evaluated using the Toronto Generalism Assessment Tool (T-GAT). EDI was evaluated using a locally developed novel tool. Analysis included descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficient.
resultsA total of 49 simulated cases were reviewed. Twelve generalism and 5 EDI items were scored on a 5-point Likert scale, with higher scores indicating better demonstration of generalism or EDI within a case. Average generalism score across all cases was 45.6/60. Average EDI score across all cases was 11.7/25. Only 21/49 cases included representation of one or more diverse identity categories. The most common diverse identity represented was non-white races/ethnicities, and the identity represented the least was diversity in language fluency. Generalism and EDI scores demonstrated a weak positive correlation (R
conclusionsQuantitative evaluation of simulated cases using specific generalism and EDI scoring tools was successful in generating insight into areas of improvement for teaching cases. This approach identified key content areas for case improvement and identities that are currently underrepresented in teaching cases. Similar approaches could be feasibly used by other medical schools to improve generalism and EDI in teaching cases or other curricular materials.
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.