ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Making clinical teaching visible-A time and motion study of hospital rounds in undergraduate medical teaching.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Teaching medical students in the clinical setting is frequently perceived as a demanding commitment by attending physicians. There is a paucity of data measuring the duration and efficacy of teaching during clinical rounds. Aim: The aim of this study was to assess both the quantity and quality of clinical teaching time dedicated to medical students on hospital ward rounds. Methods: A cross-sectional direct structured observational study was conducted during the morning rounds of attending physicians involved in teaching undergraduate medical students at three different clinical facilities in three different specialties. A validated observational tool was used by four observers to record teaching time and quality indicators. Results: In terms of teaching duration, it was observed that 25% of the total morning round time was allocated to teaching. However, this measure varied widely between different physicians and specialties. As for teaching quality, actions categorized as active teaching by the teachers were observed in 19% of the interactions observed per round, while active learning by the students was observed in 17% of the interactions per round. Teacher high-cognition interactions were similarly observed in 23% of actions per round, while student high-cognition interactions occurred in 16% of actions per round. Internal Medicine tended to score higher than both Pediatrics and Surgery in terms of percentage teaching time as well as percentage of active teaching observed per round. Using liberal criteria, rounds characterized overall as predominantly active or high-cognition by both teachers and students were observed in only 21% of the total number of rounds observed. Conclusion: These results indicate that the percentage of teaching time during ward rounds is highly variable, and that round teaching generally consists of passive and low-cognition interactions. Future work is needed to train clinical faculty to achieve a desired level of teaching quality, and to determine if there are any changes in teaching time commitments and student outcomes.
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.