Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41488825›Full record

ArticleF1000Research2023

Effects of visual art observation on technical skills in novice healthcare learners: A scoping review.

Koji Matsumoto

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

1 author.

Koji MatsumotoFaculty of Economics, Nagoya Gakuin University, 1-25, Atsuta-nishi-machi, Atsuta-ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 456-8612, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-1360-1011

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Recently, health professional education uses visual art observation to promote various observation-related technical skills. This article maps the studies on such interventions, scrutinizes what they measured as observational skills, and discusses their effectiveness. Methods: Following the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews, a scoping review was conducted. Publications from 2001 on were identified by searching four databases and by hand searching. The author screened each publication using the pre-designed eligibility criteria: participants were novice healthcare learners enrolled in visual art observation training; the study aimed to evaluate the effect of the intervention on technical skills related to observation; the skills were objectively measured. The author extracted relevant information from the included papers without additional inquiry into the study authors. The extracted information was illustrated in both a tabular and descriptive format. Results: 3,157 publications were identified, of which 18 articles were included. Few studies had valid and reliable experiments. The relatively valid evidence is that the participants listed more elements or signs for artistic or medical images. Conclusions: Sound evidence is lacking for all the technical skills intended to be fostered. Observation skills for artistic images have not been demonstrated to transfer to technical skills. Nor do the studies show that they promoted accurate diagnoses and reduced misdiagnoses. Additionally, the evidence on verbalizing skills is not isolated from the impact of discussions and is unclear regarding its transfer to actual communication. For the others, there are not enough valid studies on technical skills. This is true for studies that directly examine promoting accurate diagnosis or reducing misdiagnosis. Moreover, there may be promising alternatives to visual art observations for cultivating such technical skills, but no comparative studies were conducted.

Indexed as

ArtClinical CompetenceHealth PersonnelHumansdiagnostic accuracyintuitionmental imagesobservation skillspattern recognitionperceptual learningscaffoldingverbalizing skillsvisual arts observation

Identifiers

PMID41488825
PMCPMC12759281

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.