ArticleBMC medical education2025
The potential of uncertainty tolerance measures to identify specific needs of first-year medical residents: an exploratory study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- First-year residents' experiences of uncertainty in rural and urban emergency departments.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Correction: The potential of uncertainty tolerance measures to identify specific needs of first-year medical residents: an exploratory study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to explore 1st year residents’ responses to five different uncertainty tolerance (UT) measures, varying in their specificity to physicians and medical practice, and to compare their ability to classify residents according to their level of UT in this population.
methods202 residents beginning training at two Norwegian hospitals in 2021–2023 completed the Physicians’ Reaction to Uncertainty (PRU), a physician-specific UT measure, as well as 4 non-specific measures: Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS-12), Tolerance for Ambiguity (TFA), Pearson’s Risk Attitude (PRA), and Ambiguity Aversion in Medicine (AAM). We described psychometric properties using exploratory factor analysis (EFA). We then applied hierarchical cluster analysis to assess the utility of the PRU and the 4 non-physician-specific measures in classifying residents.
resultsResidents’ mean length of clinical work experience was 9.6 months (SD 7.6). 137 (68.2%) were female, 125 (62.2%) went to medical schools in Scandinavian-speaking countries. The exploratory factor analysis of all measures together revealed five factors. Factor 1 consisted of all PRU items and four items from TFA and explained 50.4% of the variance. In step 1, the cluster analysis based on PRU alone produced three stable clusters, with high (n = 58, 29%), intermediate (n = 108, 54%), or low (n = 36, 18%) UT. In step 2, a cluster analysis based on all measures produced three clusters, with high (n = 81, 40%), intermediate (n = 67, 33%), or low (n = 54, 27%) UT. Of the 58 with high UT according to PRU, three (5%) had intermediate UT using all instruments combined. Of the 36 with low UT according to PRU, 12 (33%) had high or intermediate UT using all instruments combined. Female residents and residents who studied medicine outside Scandinavia displayed lower UT.
conclusionPRU appears to be a reliable, discriminatory, and feasible measure for identifying junior physicians who are predisposed to stress or other aversive psychological reactions to the uncertainties of clinical care. High UT measured by PRU indicates high UT according to other measures, while low UT according to PRU is less indicative. Hence, non-physician-specific UT measures appear to assess specific dimensions of UT that could assist supervisors and residents understand different responses to uncertainty.
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.