ArticleThe journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM
The Use of a Hemodynamic Monitor Perceptual and Adaptive Learning Module to Improve Clinical Interpretation Skills in Anesthesiology Residents.
Article in The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Perceptual and adaptive learning modules (PALMs) are educational tools designed to enhance pattern recognition and long-term memory. We evaluated the impact of a hemodynamic monitor PALM on first-year anesthesiology residents' performance in diagnosing clinical abnormalities via waveform and vital sign interpretation on simulated monitors. Methods: First-year residents were randomly assigned to a group (n = 20) that used the hemodynamic monitor PALM or a control group (n = 21) that did not. Both groups received a pretest that measured their accuracy and fluency (percentage of responses that were both accurate and made within a target response time) in hemodynamic monitoring interpretation. The PALM group then completed the PALM and an immediate posttest within 30 minutes. The Control group only completed an immediate posttest within 30 minutes. Both groups received a delayed test after 1 month. Accuracy and fluency in diagnosing clinical abnormalities at 1 month were the primary outcomes. Results: Pretest accuracy and fluency were similar between the 2 groups. The PALM group accuracy (mean = 87% ± 3%) and fluency (mean = 64% ± 4%) were statistically significantly better than the control group accuracy (mean = 67% ± 6%, Conclusions: Exposure to a hemodynamic monitor PALM significantly improved the accuracy and fluency in diagnosing clinical abnormalities in a group of first-year anesthesiology residents at 1 month. The hemodynamic monitor PALM can be used to enhance the interpretation of waveform abnormalities in novices.
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.