Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40308865›Full record

ReviewAEM education and training2025

A practical primer on clinical supervision of learners in the emergency department.

Sara M Krzyzaniak, Julie Tondt, Natalie Strokes, Nicholas Hartman, Josh Davis, Benjamin H Schnapp

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in AEM education and training, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sara M KrzyzaniakStanford University Palo Alto California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8173-2750
Julie TondtPenn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center Hershey Pennsylvania USA.
Natalie StrokesUMass Chan Medical School, Baystate Springfield Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-9034-3983
Nicholas HartmanWake Forest University Winston-Salem North Carolina USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5188-0584
Josh DavisUniversity of Kansas School of Medicine Wichita Kansas USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6096-2856
Benjamin H SchnappUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison Wisconsin USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5031-8269

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Effective supervision of learners in the clinical environment is essential for learner professional development and patient safety. Despite this importance, many supervising attendings receive little to no training around supervising learners. As faculty join emergency departments (EDs) at primary and affiliate training sites, it is essential to provide them with a framework to utilize when approaching learner supervision. Methods: A workgroup of members from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Education Committee was formed to respond to a directive from the SAEM board to identify best practices for new clinician educators when supervising learners. Drawing on their experience and expertise in learner supervision, medical education, and faculty development, the members completed a literature search to identify best practices in supervision, with a special focus on the ED environment. Analysis: The workgroup identified three domains that must be considered to provide effective supervision to learners: learner characteristics, supervisor characteristics, and clinical environment. Recommendations: Implementing effective supervision in the clinical environment requires a multifaceted approach and consideration of factors for both the learner and the supervisor. Direct observation, supplemented by standardized assessment tools, is the preferred supervision method; however, the demands of our clinical environment may require supervisors to assess the learner's proficiency using other methods including informal knowledge assessments, inference from oral presentations, review of clinical documentation, feedback from patients themselves, procedural walkthroughs, and secondhand information from the health care or training team.

Identifiers

PMID40308865
PMCPMC12038728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.