ArticleAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2025
The liminal space of metacognitive reflection: the art of contradistinction (a response to define or not define).
Article in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2025. 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
- Comment on
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this commentary, the authors respond to Ellaway & Patocka's "To define or not to define: A commentary on the Case for Metacognitive Reflection," which raised several thoughtful and discerning questions concerning the implications of defining, or alternatively, refraining from defining constructs. The authors advocate for navigating the liminal space between precision and flexibility, acknowledging the dynamic and permeable nature of conceptual boundaries while striving for clarity. Moreover, they emphasize that only after a boundary is described can the tensions, gaps, exceptions, and contradictions around that boundary be explored. Finally, the authors highlight the significance of contextual definitions, fostering shared understanding, and embracing abductive reasoning (when is becomes as) to promote dialogue and advance knowledge in health professions education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40064732What 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.