Trial reportBMC medical education2026
Application of a modified Peyton's four-step approach in clinical skills training for residents: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundPeyton's four-step approach is a common teaching method in medical resident training. However, it has shortcomings such as long teaching duration, low efficiency, and poor long-term retention. This study proposed a modified Peyton's four-step approach and explored its effectiveness in teaching clinical skills for wound dressing and suture removal to residents.
methodsOne hundred and twenty residents were selected and randomly divided into an experimental group (n = 60) and a control group (n = 60). The experimental group received training using the modified Peyton's four-step approach, while the control group received training using the traditional Peyton's four-step approach. Teaching outcomes were evaluated by assessing residents' clinical skills through objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) and administering questionnaires immediately after training and one month later.
resultsAfter training, the OSCE scores of the experimental group (94.80 ± 3.02) were higher than those of the control group (93.15 ± 2.62). Notably, one month after training, the OSCE scores of the experimental group (94.13 ± 2.00) remained significantly higher than those of the control group (88.30 ± 4.89). These differences were statistically significant (p < 0.05). Questionnaire surveys indicated that residents in the experimental group believed the modified Peyton's four-step approach better stimulated learning interest, improved active learning, enhanced teamwork, and strengthened clinical skills. Satisfaction with the teaching method was also higher in the experimental group compared to the control group (p < 0.05).
conclusionThe modified Peyton's four-step approach demonstrates significant teaching effectiveness in the clinical skills training of residents. It not only improves the level of clinical operational skills but also enhances teaching efficiency and short- to medium-term skill retention, making it a superior teaching model worthy of promotion.
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.