Background Acquisition of procedures is an important element in health professions education. Traditionally procedures are taught using a “see one - do one” approach. That is a teacher demonstrates and describes a procedure and afterwards the students practice the procedure. A more recent teaching approach for the acquisition of procedural skills was presented by Walker and Peyton. Peyton’s teaching approach is a stepwise teaching approach and consists of the following four steps: demonstration, deconstruction, comprehension and performance. The aims of this study were (i) to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of Peyton’s 4–step teaching approach on the acquisition of procedural skills in health professions education and (ii) to evaluate whether studies with fewer students per teacher showed a larger between group difference than studies with more students per teacher. Methods We searched in Medline, PsycInfo, Embase and ERIC for eligible studies. Records were screened by two independent reviewers. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to evaluate skill acquisition and time needed to perform the procedures at post-acquisition and retention tests. A meta-regression was used to explore the effect of the number of students per teacher on the estimated effect of the educational interventions. Results An effect size of 0.45 SMD (95% CI [0.15; 0.75]) at post-acquisition and 0.7 SMD (95% CI [−0.09; 1.49]) at retention testing were in favour of Peyton’s teaching approach for skill acquisition. The groups using Peyton’s teaching approach needed considerably less time to perform the procedure at post-acquisition (SMD: −0.8; 95% [CI −2.13 to 1.62]) and retention (SMD: −2.65; 95% CI [−7.77 to 2.47]) testing. The effectiveness of Peyton’s teaching approach was less clear in subgroup analyses using peer teachers. Meta-regression showed that the number of students per teacher was an important moderator variable. Conclusion Peyton’s teaching approach is an effective teaching approach for skill acquisition of procedural skills in health professions education. When peer students or student tutors are used as teachers the effectiveness of Peyton’s teaching approach is less clear. Peyton’s teaching approach is more effective when small groups with few students per teacher are used.
ObjectivesTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for cam or pincer morphology in individuals with suspected femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome and to evaluate their clinical utility.DesignA systematic review of studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for cam and pincer morphology.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesStudies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for cam, pincer or mixed morphology in symptomatic patients. Patients had to undergo an index test and a reference test able to identify cam or pincer morphology. Study results have to allow the calculation of true or false positives and/or negatives to calculate sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR) and post-test probabilities.ResultsEight studies were included, investigating 17 tests and two test combinations. The studies reported a low specificity for all tests, ranging from 0.11 to 0.56. Sensitivity ranged from 0.11 to 1.00, with high sensitivities for the flexion-adduction-internal rotation (FADIR), foot progression angle walking (FPAW) and maximal squat tests. We estimated that negative test results on all of these three tests would result in a negative LR of 0.15. However, we judged the studies to provide low-quality evidence.ConclusionThere is low-quality evidence that negative test results reduce the post-test probability of cam or mixed morphologies and that consecutive testing with the FADIR, FPAW and maximal squat tests might be used as a clinical test combination. We would not recommend their use to confirm the diagnosis of FAI syndrome.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018079116.
Risk of bias (RoB) assessment of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is vital to conducting systematic reviews. Manual RoB assessment for hundreds of RCTs is a cognitively demanding, lengthy process and is prone to subjective judgment. Supervised machine learning (ML) can help to accelerate this process but requires a hand-labelled corpus. There are currently no RoB annotation guidelines for randomized clinical trials or annotated corpora. In this pilot project, we test the practicality of directly using the revised Cochrane RoB 2.0 guidelines for developing an RoB annotated corpus using a novel multi-level annotation scheme. We report inter-annotator agreement among four annotators who used Cochrane RoB 2.0 guidelines. The agreement ranges between 0% for some bias classes and 76% for others. Finally, we discuss the shortcomings of this direct translation of annotation guidelines and scheme and suggest approaches to improve them to obtain an RoB annotated corpus suitable for ML.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.