ArticleMedical science educator2025
A Comparative, Individual Values-Based Scoring Approach to the Secure Flourish Index Among Clinical Health Professions Students.
Article in Medical science educator, 2025. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate flourishing among medical (MD), physician assistant (PA), and nurse practitioner (NP) students, using the novel Secure Flourish Index (SFI). Method: MD, PA, and NP students from two institutions completed the traditional SFI (tSFI), then applied a percentage weight to each of the six domains (maximum total 100%) based on perceived relative importance to their overall flourishing, creating a novel self-weighted SFI score (swSFI). The Bland-Altman (BA) plot was used to assess the magnitude of agreement between scores. Results: The BA plot (n = 281) revealed a mean bias of .07(95% CI -.50,.63). Eighteen participants (6.4%) fell outside of the calculated BA limits of agreement [-9.31 [95% CI - 10.27,-8.45] and 9.45 [95% CI 8.49,10.41]]. Linear regression revealed the mean BA score is predictive of the mean difference between scores [R Conclusion: Accounting for individual values is important when measuring student flourishing but is missing from current operant definitions. The overall mean difference (bias) in tSFI and swSFI scores is minimal (.07, possible range 0-120). However, the bias becomes larger as individual mean flourishing scores move towards both the high and low ends of the flourishing spectrum. This indicates that the influence of weighting flourishing domains is larger for individuals with high or low flourishing than those with moderate flourishing. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02182-x.
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.