ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2024
Dual Coaching of Medical Clerkship Students' History Taking Skills by Volunteer Inpatients at the Bedside and Faculty Physicians on Zoom During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 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.
- Dual Coaching of Medical Clerkship Students' History-Taking Skills by Volunteer Inpatients at the Bedside and Faculty Physicians on Zoom during the COVID-19 Pandemic [Letter].Advances in medical education and practice · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Coaching is a well-described means of providing real-time, actionable feedback to learners. We aimed to determine whether dual coaching from faculty physicians and real inpatients led to an improvement in history-taking skills of clerkship medical students. Patients and Methods: Expert faculty physicians (on Zoom) directly observed 13 clerkship medical students as they obtained a history from 26 real, hospitalized inpatients (in person), after which students received immediate feedback from both the physician and the patient. De-identified audio-video recordings of all interviews were scored by independent judges using a previously validated clinical rating tool to assess for improvement in history-taking skills between the two interviews. Finally, all participants completed a survey with Likert scale questions and free-text prompts. Results: Students' history-taking skills - specifically in the domains of communication, medical knowledge and professional conduct - on the validated rating tool, as evaluated by the independent judges, did not significantly improve between their first and second patient interviews. However, students rated the dual coaching as overwhelmingly positive (average score of 1.43, with 1 being Excellent and 5 being Poor), with many appreciating the specificity and timeliness of the feedback. Patients also rated the experience very highly (average score of 1.23, with 1 being Excellent and 5 being Poor), noting that they gained new insights into medical training. Conclusion: Students value receiving immediate and specific feedback and real patients enjoy participating in the feedback process. Dual physician-patient coaching is a unique way to incorporate more direct observation into undergraduate medical education curricula.
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.