Table 1.

Non-controlled studies during the pre-clinical years

Author	Year	N	Type of encounter			Video review setting		Outcome studied						Findings	Video helpful
			CS	PE	TS	I	G	SA	S	FB	FA	OA	PA		Yes	No
Calhoun55	1988	187		×				×	×				×	Video review demonstrated that students not very good at self and peer assessment		×
Cassata53	1976	48	×				×		×					Student satisfaction initially very low, however improved after faculty education		×
Farnill52	1997	60	×				×	×	×			×		Improved student confidence and improved interview skills	×
Farnill90	1997	60	×				×			×	×	×	×	Students improved interview performance after video review	×
Hoppe48	1988	30	×				×	×		×				Interviewing skills improved	×
Hulsman49	2009	304	×				×	×	×				×	Interviewing skills improved. Self-assessment not improved	×
Kneebone46	2002	51	×		×	×		×	×	×		×		Students perceived video review as very helpful for improving wound closure and foley catheter placement skills	×
Rudy91	2001	82	×				×	×			×		×	Used video review to compare self-assessment peer assessment and faculty assessment	×
Terasaki50	1984	32	×			×				×	×			Compared interviews before and after video feedback	×
Vnuk54	2006	95	×		×	×		×						Self-assessment skills did not improve after video review		×
Werner51	1974	87	×				×				×			Students improved interview performance after video review	×
Zick92	2007	674	×			×		×						Enabled students to give open ended self-assessment of their own videos	×

Abbreviations: N, number of students; CS, communication skills; PE, physical exam; TS, technical skills; I, individual; G, group; SA, self-assessment; S, satisfaction; FB, feedback; FA, faculty assessment; OA, other assessment; PA, peer assessment.