ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2025
The clinical assessment experience of operating room technology students.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch evidence indicates an average quality of clinical assessment of operating room technology students, and so far, no specific assessment model has been offered to measure the clinical skills of these students. Therefore, the aim of this research was to explain the live experiences of operating room technology students with regard to clinical assessment challenges. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis qualitative study was conducted using the content analysis approach, and ten eligible students selected by purposeful sampling were included in the study. The data were collected using semistructured interviews with questions such as "What is your opinion on a good assessment?" The collected data were analyzed according to the steps proposed by Graneheim and Lundman.
resultsBased on the deep and rich descriptions vocalized by the participants, three themes and eight subthemes were obtained. The subthemes related to the issues pertaining to the executive agents of clinical assessments included "instructor's inappropriate attitudes and qualifications" and "self-assessment". The subthemes related to the necessities and methods of the assessment included "inappropriate assessment of practical skills and activities", "unavailability of the necessary equipment", "non-transparent assessment methods", and "inadequate assessment time". The subthemes related to the mental and behavioral status of the executive agents of assessments included "inappropriate interpersonal relationships" and "insufficient self-confidence".
conclusionBased on the results of this research, instructors should improve their necessary practical skills and knowledge about clinical assessments and apply new methods and tools for executing these types of assessments.
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.