A cluster randomised crossover trial of single resilience and professionalism tutorials among undergraduate medical students
Bibliographic Data
While we found increased self-efficacy and professionalism scores, these could not be related to the efficacy of respective single tutorials, suggesting that multiple tutorials are required to impact these outcomes. While cross-over designs are feasible to implement, logistical issues may detract from their efficacy. Tutorials could potentially be improved by introducing more interactive learning methods
Alternative medicine · Cluster (spacecraft · Crossover study · Family medicine · Medical education · Psychological resilience · Randomized controlled trial · Resilience (materials science · Computer Science · Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout · Innovations in Medical Education · Medical Education and Admissions · Medicine · Psychology · Internal Medicine
Supporting best practice in reflexive thematic analysis reporting in Palliative Medicine
Cognitive load theory in health professional education
A validity and reliability study of the coping self‐efficacy scale
Reframing Medical Education to Support Professional Identity Formation
Why Does Patient Activation Matter? An Examination of the Relationships Between Patient Activation and Health-Related Outcomes
Stress and depression among medical students
Prevalence of Depression, Depressive Symptoms, and Suicidal Ideation Among Medical Students
The brief resilience scale
A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis
Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis
To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales
Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis
Validation of the coping self-efficacy scale
The impact of stress on students in secondary school and higher education
One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis
Understanding communication of health information
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |