ArticleMedical science educator2025
Fruits of the Professional Educator Appreciation and Recognition (PEAR) Awards: Learning what Students Value in Their Medical Educators.
Article in Medical science educator, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The Professional Educator Appreciation and Recognition (PEAR) awards program was created by students at Baylor College of Medicine (BCM) in 2020 to recognize exemplary educators. We reviewed our 3-year experience of this initiative to identify characteristics of award-winning educators, and to assess the award's impact. Materials and Methods: We reviewed the title, department, and clinical affiliation of award winners. Using ChatGPT, we qualitatively analyzed de-identified nomination narratives to identify themes of educator characteristics most valued by students. Following refinement by the study team, each award was then assigned one or more themes. Unsolicited thank-you emails were reviewed to consider the impact of the award upon recipients. Results: Of 202 award recipients, most were near-peers (two-thirds were assistant professors or residents). Winners were affiliated with diverse departments and disciplines. Students most valued outstanding teaching skills (36.6%), showing support by being kind, encouraging, or approachable (26.7%), and investing time in trainees via constructive feedback (26.7%). Unsolicited thank-you emails from 20% of recipients conveyed the meaning of the award for the winning educators. Conclusions: A review of the BCM PEAR award program identified educator characteristics most valued by students, providing targets for professional development. This low-cost, high-impact initiative may enhance educator wellness and motivate professional behaviors. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02234-2.
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.