↓ Skip to main content

Conveying practical clinical skills with the help of teaching associates—a randomised trial with focus on the long term learning retention

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Conveying practical clinical skills with the help of teaching associates—a randomised trial with focus on the long term learning retention
Published in
BMC Medical Education, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-0892-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian H. Hoefer, Jasmina Sterz, Bernd Bender, Maria-Christina Stefanescu, Marius Theis, Felix Walcher, Robert Sader, Miriam Ruesseler

Abstract

Ensuring that all medical students achieve adequate clinical skills remains a challenge, yet the correct performance of clinical skills is critical for all fields of medicine. This study analyzes the influence of receiving feedback by teaching associates in the context of achieving and maintaining a level of expertise in complex head and skull examination. All third year students at a German university who completed the obligatory surgical skills lab training and surgical clerkship participated in this study. The students were randomized into two groups. lessons by an instructor and peer-based practical skills training. Intervention group: training by teaching associates who are examined as simulation patients and provided direct feedback on student performance. Their competency in short- and long-term competence (directly after intervention and at 4 months after the training) of head and skull examination was measured. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS Statistics version 19 (IBM, Armonk, USA). Parametric and non-parametric test methods were applied. As a measurement of correlation, Pearson correlations and correlations via Kendall's-Tau-b were calculated and Cohen's d effect size was calculated. A total of 181 students were included (90 intervention, 91 control). Out of those 181 students 81 agreed to be videotaped (32 in the control group and 49 in the TA group) and examined at time point 1. At both time points, the intervention group performed the examination significantly better (time point 1, p = <.001; time point 2 (rater 1 p = .009, rater 2 p = .015), than the control group. The effect size (Cohens d) was up to 1.422. The use of teaching associates for teaching complex practical skills is effective for short- and long-term retention. We anticipate the method could be easily translated to nearly every patient-based clinical skill, particularly with regards to a competence-based education of future doctors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 130 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 17%
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Researcher 12 9%
Unspecified 10 8%
Other 33 25%
Unknown 24 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 25%
Social Sciences 22 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Psychology 10 8%
Unspecified 10 8%
Other 20 15%
Unknown 26 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,884,576
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,617
of 3,348 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,318
of 308,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#32
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,348 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.