ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Undergraduate pediatrics clerkship student must-see list: prioritization and agreement between students and faculty in the UAE.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ensuring reliable exposure to core pediatric problems during the clerkship is challenging when case-mix varies across clinical sites. A data-informed, stakeholder-aligned "must-see" list can focus bedside encounters and guide supplemental teaching. Objective: To identify prioritized pediatric illnesses mapped to common clinical presentations, quantify agreement between students and faculty/physicians, and estimate the number of student raters needed for reliable curriculum monitoring. Design setting and participants: UAE-based cross-sectional survey of undergraduate medical students who completed the pediatrics clerkship and faculty/physicians involved in undergraduate pediatric teaching. Methods: Illnesses nested within clinical presentation sections were rated on a 5-point priority scale (5 = must see, 1 = must not see). Means ± SEM were summarized by illness and subgroup (students/doctors), illnesses were ranked, and group alignment was examined using Pearson r (95% CI via Fisher z), Spearman rho, and two-way ICCs based on illness-level subgroup means. Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate adjustment was applied to per-presentation tests. A generalizability-theory decision study (D-study) projected reliability (G-coefficient) across different numbers of student raters. Results: Forty-nine usable responses were analyzed (39 students, 10 faculty/physicians). Highest-rated items included asthma, bronchiolitis, pneumonia, gastroenteritis, febrile seizure, iron deficiency anemia, and heart murmur. Students' and doctors' illness-level means were strongly aligned (Pearson r = 0.863, 95% CI 0.794-0.910, Conclusion: Students and faculty/physicians showed strong alignment on a practical, presentation-based core of pediatric "must-see" illnesses. Programs can prioritize real-patient exposure for the highest-ranked problems, use simulation or structured cases when exposure is limited, and monitor exposure with low-burden periodic surveys.
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.