ArticleCureus2024
Exploring Medical Student Attitudes Regarding Inter-university Learning: A Pilot Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The United Kingdom needs to educate more medical students to meet workforce demands. With static numbers of clinical teachers available, novel and efficient approaches are required to prepare students for real-life work where doctors routinely work with colleagues from different medical schools. This innovative project was designed to investigate student attitudes towards inter-university learning (IUL), whereby two medical students from different universities learn together. Materials and methods Thirteen students at Great Western Hospital, Swindon, England, volunteered and were randomly paired with a student from another university. Pairs completed a 20-minute simulated clinical scenario and observed three others. Students completed pre- and post-session questionnaires adapted from the Readiness for Inter-Professional Learning scale. Seven students took part in semi-structured interviews which underwent thematic analysis. Results Quantitative analysis of post-session questionnaires demonstrated a positive response to IUL. Thematic analysis generated six themes: impact on learning, impact on career, working together, recognising differences, practical considerations, and psychosocial perspectives. Discussion Students enjoyed the social learning opportunity to practise team-working, communication, and role delegation with unknown peers whilst sharing different clinical approaches. Differences in course structure meant students displayed varying strengths, although unexpected findings centred around pre-conceptions of both universities and social comparison behaviours. Conclusion IUL's strength was deemed to be in non-technical skill development to prepare for real-life work, ultimately enhancing patient safety. Practicalities to consider include session design and psychological safety. IUL provides a novel solution to efficiently educate future healthcare professionals and further work to explore its benefits on a wider scale is suggested.
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.