Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39114774›Full record

Trial reportCanadian medical education journal2024

'

Jamie S Chua, Merel van Diepen, Marjolijn D Trietsch, Friedo W Dekker, Johanna Schönrock-Adema, Jacqueline Bustraan

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Canadian medical education journal, 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

6 authors.

Jamie S ChuaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Merel van DiepenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Marjolijn D TrietschDepartment of Gynaecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Friedo W DekkerDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Johanna Schönrock-AdemaCenter for Educational Development and Research in health sciences, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Jacqueline BustraanCenter for Innovation in Medical Education, Department of Education, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Although medical courses are frequently evaluated via surveys with Likert scales ranging from " Methods: In this study, 597 participants of a large CME course were randomly assigned to either express personal opinions on a five-point Likert scale (opinion-based method; Results: The overall response rate was 47%. The prediction-based method required fewer respondents than the opinion-based method for similar average responses. Mean response scores were similar in both groups for most questions, but prediction-based outcomes resulted in fewer extreme responses (strongly agree/disagree). Conclusions: We validated the prediction-based method in evaluating CME. We also provide practical considerations for applying this method.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, ContinuingPeer GroupAdultEducational MeasurementFemaleHumansMaleStudents, MedicalSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID39114774
PMCPMC11302746

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.