ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2025
Redesigning Advanced Life Support teaching and assessment using a constructive alignment approach.
Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Enhancing theoretical BLS knowledge with virtual reality: a randomized controlled trial in medical students.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Redesigning Advanced Life Support teaching and assessment using a constructive alignment approach.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advanced Life Support (ALS) is a crucial component of medical training. Previously, a single-person OSCE-Station (Objective Structured Clinical Exam) was used to assess these skills, focusing primarily on the team leader role and emphasizing theoretical knowledge. However, students demonstrated deficiencies in key algorithm-compliant practical skills, such as cardiac massage, mask ventilation and defibrillator use, and struggled to integrate into a team-based resuscitation approach. To address this, a constructive alignment approach was used to revise the course and offer a guideline-appropriate, three-person resuscitation model. Learning outcomes and assessment targets were aligned with the course activities to increase student engagement and increase desired skill attainment. In the summer semester 2023, students and lecturers were briefed on the new structure of the course and assessment, specific skills were highlighted, and a model video was provided. The OSCE format was adjusted to assess both practical and non-technical skills. In the new setup, each student was randomly assigned one of three roles and assessed using role-specific checklists with defined criteria, focusing on non-technical and practical abilities. Course activity included training and practice in the three-person resuscitation approach. A team OSCE (tOSCE) approach for assessment was used, with one student for each role being examined. Results indicated both subjective and objective markers of satisfaction in course activities and tOSCE results. A team-based OSCE station proves effective for teaching combined practical and non-technical competencies.
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.