Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40502911›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Standardized Patient Experience With the Fundoscopic Exam.

Nisha Chadha, Joanne Hojsak, Neeti Parikh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Nisha ChadhaOphthalmology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA.
Joanne HojsakPediatric Critical Care Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA.
Neeti ParikhOphthalmology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Best practices for teaching physical examination skills to medical students often involve the use of standardized patients (SPs). However, few medical schools utilize SPs specifically for teaching fundoscopy, and limited information exists on how best to prepare SPs for this unique examination. This study aims to explore SPs' attitudes, experiences, and comfort levels in teaching the fundoscopic exam. Methods Twenty-six SPs who participated in fundoscopy training sessions - 16 from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and 10 from the University of California, San Francisco - were invited to complete optional pre- and post-session surveys assessing their attitudes toward and comfort with the fundoscopic exam and pupil dilation. Results All 26 participants (100%) completed the pre-survey, and 21 (80%) completed the post-survey. Of these, 77% had worked as SPs for at least three years, and 73% had previous experience with fundoscopy sessions. During the training, 17 out of 21 SPs underwent pupil dilation, with four opting to dilate only one eye. Eighty percent reported satisfaction with the information provided about dilation, and 90% were satisfied with the guidance on what to expect from learners. The average reported comfort level during the exam was 3.76 out of 5. All SPs expressed willingness to participate in future fundoscopy sessions, with 90% open to doing so with dilation. Main concerns included the duration of dilation and extended exposure to bright light. Conclusions With proper orientation, SPs feel comfortable participating in fundoscopic examinations involving ocular dilation.

Indexed as

fundoscopymedical student educationophthalmology teachingstandardized patientundergraduate clinical skills education

Identifiers

PMID40502911
PMCPMC12151919

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.