ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Effects of digital versus face-to-face peer support on clinical skills: a three-arm randomized trial.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07186569 (The Effect of Digital Interactive and Face-to-Face Peer Support on Medical Students' Clinical Skill Performance, Reflection Skills, and Retention of Clinical Skills), which is not on this 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.
The Effect of Digital Interactive and Face-to-Face Peer Support on Medical Students' Clinical Skill Performance, Reflection Skills, and Retention of Clinical Skills
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Digital interactive peer support may strengthen clinical skills when technology is coupled with pedagogy. This study was designed as a three-arm randomized controlled trial (N = 98) involving medical students and compared a digital peer-feedback platform with face-to-face peer support and routine instructor feedback during training for intravenous injection, suturing/knot tying, and endotracheal intubation. OSCE performance was assessed post-intervention and at 7 weeks; reflection skills were measured with the Groningen Reflection Ability Scale (Turkish version). Reflective journals underwent content analysis and were integrated with quantitative findings. Complete outcome data were available for 82 participants. Post-test and retention OSCE scores varied by group in all skills (Kruskal-Wallis H = 28.95-47.45, all p < 0.001), with the highest and most consistent score observed in the digital arm. Reflective ability scores also favoured the digital arm (all p = 0.001). Qualitative themes identified revisitable video evidence, explicit criteria, and peer coaching as affordances for self-regulation, while technical frictions impeded certain learners. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; registration number: NCT07186569; date of registration: September 22, 2025.
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.