Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41798379›Full record

ReviewMedical science educator2025

Do Medical Schools Need to Adapt Their Curriculum in Order to Teach Medical Students 'Webside' Manner? A Systematic Review.

A Newnham, T Tattersall, J Odendaal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical science educator, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

A NewnhamUniversity Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire, Coventry, CV2 2DX UK.ORCID 0009-0000-7656-6201
T TattersallDivision of Biomedical Sciences, Clinical Sciences Research Laboratories, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV2 2DX UK.
J OdendaalUniversity Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire, Coventry, CV2 2DX UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Remote consulting was exponentially implemented secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic, and remains a staple of modern healthcare. Telemedicine consulting requires a different set of consultation skills collectively coined 'webside manner'. Evidence suggests inadequate training is a barrier to effective teleconsulting. This review aims to systematically assess the effect of telemedicine consultation skills training for medical students. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and EMBASE. Two independent reviewers screened articles from 1 January 2010 onwards. A mixed-methods approach was undertaken. Thematic analysis identified three reporting themes. Quantitative data was reported within these themes using descriptive statistics. Study quality was assessed using the MERSQI score. Findings: In total, 241 articles were obtained, 38 extracted for full text review, and 11 included. Three themes were identified: communication skills, doctor-patient relationship, and confidence in performing virtual consultations. Six out of seven studies reported improved communication skills following telemedicine training. Three studies report a positive impact on the doctor-patient relationship. Student confidence showed improvement in all reporting studies. Conclusion: This review demonstrates a positive association between telemedicine training and improved virtual consultation skills for medical students. The results are limited by the low quality and heterogeneity of included studies.

Indexed as

Medical studentsSystematic reviewTelemedicineVirtual consultation

Identifiers

PMID41798379
PMCPMC12961046

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.