ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2025
Evaluating the Competency and Confidence in ECG Interpretation Among Residents: A Multi-Center Pilot Study.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- ABCD Framework-Based Stratified Analysis of ECG Interpretation Among Chinese Internal Medicine Residents: A Cross-Sectional Study.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Electrocardiography (ECG) is a pivotal diagnostic tool. However, the accuracy of ECGs interpretation by resident varies from region to region, but overall interpretation ability is poor. The aim to assess whether the low competency described worldwide are also prevalent in the Chinese residents. Methods: This pilot study was a cross-sectional, questionnaire-based assessment of ECG interpretation skills of residents (n=165). We selected eight 12-lead ECGs. Each ECG was provided with a brief clinical scenario, consisted of age, gender, and chief complaint. Results: The Cronbach's Alpha for Likert scale used item questionnaire was 0.75. In the university learning situation, only a small number of students considered they were proficient in ECG (n=3, 1.82%). More than half of residents (n=102, 61.82%) relearned the ECG knowledge during their clinical clerkships. The overall ECG interpretation ability is poor, as ECG test scores were 6(4,8). Just 17 residents (10.3%) scored more than 10 points. The non-internal medicine residents had a better performance in the interpretation of supraventricular tachycardia compared with internal medicine residents (median score 2 versus 0, p<0.05). The highest competency was observed in the ST elevated myocardial infarction (correct rate 54.55%). The poorest ability to misread ECG was long QT and left bundle branch block (correct rate 0.61% and 0.00%). Few participants reported complete confidence about their diagnosis (less than 10%). Conclusion: Our research reveals that residents do not appear to be prepared to interpret ECG abnormalities, including common emergencies and common abnormalities, even the normal ECG strip.
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.