Advanced Trainee-Led Physician Clinical Examination Workshop: Improving Training and Culture

Advanced Trainee-Led Physician Clinical Examination Workshop: Improving Training and Culture

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

A: Good

 

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Very good

 

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Very good

 

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Good

 

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Very good

 

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Very good

 

Comments: The Discussion section aptly summarizes the observations of the study with the help of relevant literature. It states that advanced trainees (AT)-driven near-to-peer teaching significantly enhances the leadership and teaching skills among basic physician trainees (BPTs). It highlights the benefits of this innovative AT-led clinical exam workshop which help improving the work culture, clinical examination and presentation skills among BPTs. Limitations of this study are also properly addressed.

 

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Very good

 

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Very good

 

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

 

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Very good

 

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Good

 

Comments:

·       Words like “trainee”, “learning”, “minutes”, “innovative” are misspelled in the text section of the article.

·       In the 7th paragraph, the word “around” should be replaced with “to” before “clinical exam preparation”.

 

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This study focuses on the significance of near-to-peer teaching which consists of short case examination sessions and long case teaching points and demonstrations led by advanced trainees (ATs) for basic physician trainees (BPTs) to improve training culture, well-being for all participants, exam success rates, clinical examinations and presentation skills. It reports that this workshop appears to be cost-effective, feasible and improves skill acquisition and confidence among all participants. Few limitations of this study include venue, course timing, and lack of patients with clinical signs which call for further detailed validation studies. Future studies are required to improve the workshop which include a review of the timing of the course, teaching venue, structure of interactive sessions and early distribution of course materials for trainees.

 

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes- Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team 

 
 

Author Info

Corresponding Author
Prianka Puri
Department of Renal Medicine, The Canberra Hospital, Canberra, ACT, Australia

Article Info

Article Type
Research Article
Publication history
Received: Sat 13, Mar 2021
Accepted: Wed 07, Apr 2021
Published: Tue 08, Jun 2021
Copyright
© 2021 Prianka Puri. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Hosting by Science Repository. All rights reserved.
DOI: 10.31487/j.JCMCR.2021.01.01