ArticleMedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources2025
Code Status Discussions: A Standardized Patient Workshop for Senior Medical Students.
Article in MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Residents frequently conduct code status discussions (CSDs) with patients, but many report not receiving formal training in this skill. While institutions have attempted to address this, there remains a need for a curriculum that uses standardized patients (SPs), is generalizable to students interested in different medical specialties, and has been tested on a large sample of students. Methods: We trained 192 fourth-year medical students across four different campuses in how to conduct CSDs during one 2-hour workshop as part of their Transition to Residency course in April 2024. Students worked with SPs as part of this workshop. Students at our main campus completed pre- and postworkshop paper surveys evaluating their confidence levels across five domains. Results: A total of 84 (69%) of the 121 students at the main campus completed both a pre- and postworkshop survey. There was a statistically significant change in confidence levels from pre- to postworkshop, with a higher proportion of students selecting increased confidence levels across all five questions on the postworkshop survey. Discussion: Our workshop increased the confidence of fourth-year medical students in conducting CSDs. This session successfully implemented simulations that used SPs for training a large group of fourth-year medical students bound for different medical specialties. This is the first workshop of its size and breadth, and it may serve as a standardized curriculum for other institutions wishing to formally train medical students to conduct CSDs.
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.