Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38759331›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2024

The Surgical Clerkship in the COVID Era: A Natural Language Processing and Thematic Analysis.

Thomas Clark Howell, Joseph M Ladowski, Amanda Nash, Kristen E Rhodin, Elisabeth T Tracy, John Migaly, Diane Bloom, Cory J Vatsaas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2024. 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

8 authors.

Thomas Clark HowellDepartment of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. Electronic address: clark.howell@duke.edu.
Joseph M LadowskiDepartment of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Amanda NashDepartment of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Kristen E RhodinDepartment of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Elisabeth T TracyDepartment of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
John MigalyDepartment of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Diane BloomDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Cory J VatsaasDepartment of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.

Funding

Women's Cancer Research ProgramP30CA014236 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Laura Fish · 1985 to 2026
$174.8M
Stimulating Access to Research in Residency (StARR) - NIAIDR38AI140297 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Rachel G Greenberg, David H. Harpole · 2018 to 2026
$2.4M
The Effect of a Desensitization Protocol in Highly Sensitized Renal Transplant Recipients on T Follicular Helper CellsF32AI174651 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LADOWSKI, JOSEPH M · 2023 to 2023
$75k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014236NIAID NIH HHS F32 AI174651NIAID NIH HHS R38 AI140297
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionResponses to COVID-19 within medical education prompted significant changes to the surgical clerkship. We analyzed the changes in medical student end of course feedback before and after the COVID-19 outbreak.

methodsPostclerkship surveys from 2017 to 2022 were analyzed including both Likert scale data and free text, excluding the COVID outbreak year 2019-2020. Likert scale questions were compared between pre-COVID (2017-2019) and COVID-era cohorts (2020-2022) with the Mann-Whitney U-test. Free-text comments were analyzed using both thematic analysis and natural language processing including sentiment, word and phrase frequency, and topic modeling.

resultsOf the 483 medical students surveyed from 2017 to 2022, 297 responded (61% response rate) to the included end of clerkship surveys. Most medical students rated the clerkship above average or excellent with no significant difference between the pre-COVID and COVID-era cohorts (70.4% Versus 64.8%, P = 0.35). Perception of grading expectations did significantly differ, 51% of pre-COVID students reported clerkship grading standards were almost always clear compared to 27.5% of COVID-era students (P = 0.01). Pre-COVID cohorts more frequently mentioned learning and feedback while COVID-era cohorts more frequently mentioned case, attending, and expectation. Natural language processing topic modeling and formal thematic analysis identified similar themes: team, time, autonomy, and expectations.

conclusionsCOVID-19 presented many challenges to undergraduate medical education. Despite many changes, there was no significant difference in clerkship satisfaction ratings. Unexpectedly, the greater freedom and autonomy of asynchronous lectures and choice of cases became a highlight of the new curriculum. Future research should investigate if there are similar associations nationally with a multi-institutional study.

Indexed as

Clinical ClerkshipCOVID-19Natural Language ProcessingStudents, MedicalEducational MeasurementFemaleGeneral SurgeryHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesCOVID-19Natural language processingSurgery clerkship

Identifiers

PMID38759331
PMCPMC11189731

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.