Table 3.

Summary of Randomized Controlled Studies Evaluating Residents-as-Teachers Curriculum Published 1975 Through May 2003

Author (Year)	Participants (N)	Specialties	Teaching Intervention	Teaching Methods*	Outcome Measures	Results†
Jewett et al.10 (1982)	PGY-1/2/3 (53)	Pediatrics	Two 1/2-day workshops, two 1-hour follow-up consultation sessions. Content: developing learners’ clinical problem-solving skills, teaching and learning styles, impact of interpersonal behavior	Small group discussion, review of videotaped teaching encounter, reflection on videotaped vignette	Pre-post self-assessment of teaching attitudes; evaluation of clinical teaching skills by faculty, students, and peers on a monthly basis during course (6 months)	Significant improvement in confidence as teacher (P < .05) and in perceived positive feedback on clinical teaching (P < .01). Fifty-two percent of program participants were rated as “effective” teachers compared with 27% of controls. This difference was not statistically significant (no P values reported).
Edwards et al.8 (1988)	PGY-1 (22‡/18§)	Internal medicine, OB-Gyn, family medicine	1/2-day course Content: communicating objectives, motivating, directing attention, teaching procedures, feedback, evaluation	Small group discussion, interactive lecture, role play, review of videotaped teaching encounter	Evaluation of videotaped teaching performance during course and 6 months after course	During instruction, the experimental group had significantly higher ratings on ddx, expanding the case and overall teaching quality compared with controls (P < .017; ES 11%). At 6 months, the only significant difference was in communicating objectives (P < .017).
Dunnington and DaRosa17 (1998)	PGY (?)	General surgery	10.5-hour teaching course. Utilized reminders of course content at 2 and 4 weeks after course. Content: adult learning principles, teaching microskills, bedside teaching, feedback, psychomotor skills, teaching in the clinic/OR	Role play, standardized students	Objective structured teaching evaluation (OSTE) 6 to 7 months after course	Intervention group with few statistically significant differences on the OSTE. These differences were generally limited to 1 or 2 items on an individual OSTE station and were not consistent across the two study sites.
Furney et al.9 (2001)	PGY-1/2/3 (57)	Internal medicine	1-hour session on OMP	Lecture, small group discussion, role play	Resident self-report of use of OMP behaviors, learner ratings of resident performance of OMP behaviors.	Intervention group with statistically significant improvement in learner ratings of OMP behaviors in at least 1 item in all domains except “teach general rules” (P < .05, ES 3%–7%). Intervention group self-reported statistically significant (P < .03) improvement in all OMP behaviors except “teach general rules.”

^*Teaching methods described when known.

^†When sufficient data were available, effect size (ES) has been calculated. ES = % change between pre- and post-ratings. Calculated as (mean post-rating − mean pre-rating) × 100/maximum scale rating.

^‡Number of resident participants.

^§Number of participants who completed outcome evaluation measures.

PGY, postgraduate year; OMP, 1-minute preceptor.