ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2024
Medical student perception of force application: An accuracy assessment and pilot training program.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 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
backgroundIt is unclear how accurately students can reproduce specific forces that are often required for physical examination maneuvers. This study aimed to determine the baseline accuracy of force application for preclinical medical students, evaluate the effectiveness of a quantitative visual feedback intervention, and investigate whether certain demographics influence accuracy. MATERIALS AND
methodsFirst- and second-year medical students were enrolled and demographic data were collected. Students blindly applied their estimation of 15 lbs (6.8 kg), 3 lbs (1.4 kg), 10 lbs (4.5 kg), 1.5 lbs (0.7 kg), and 6 lbs (2.7 kg) of force on a scale. Visual feedback training was then performed wherein students applied a series of additional forces unblinded five times, and then blindly administered the same five initial forces 12 minutes and one week later. Accuracy was compared at each time point and a regression analysis was evaluated for predictors of accuracy.
resultsThirty-three students participated. The mean baseline accuracy was 38.3%, 41.1% immediately following intervention, and 35.6% one week later (
conclusionsMedical students' ability to accurately reproduce clinically relevant forces is poor. There is a clear need to implement a robust training program in medical education, and students may need multiple training sessions to refine this skill.
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.