METHODS: Two groups of final-year medical students from Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia, were recruited to participate in this quasi-experimental study. The intervention group (n = 21) received educational intervention that introduced the TWED checklist, while the control group (n = 19) received a tutorial on basic electrocardiography. Post-intervention, both groups received a similar assessment on clinical decision-making based on five case scenarios.
RESULTS: The mean score of the intervention group was significantly higher than that of the control group (18.50 ± 4.45 marks vs. 12.50 ± 2.84 marks, p < 0.001). In three of the five case scenarios, students in the intervention group obtained higher scores than those in the control group.
CONCLUSION: The results of this study support the use of the TWED checklist to facilitate metacognition in clinical decision-making.
METHODS: Through stratified random sampling, 1469 students, aged 18-19 years, were enrolled. Participants whose score achieved the aggressive evaluation standard were selected and then 60 participants were randomly divided into 2 groups: G-IPT and control. The participants in the G-IPT group received 16 sessions of treatment, whereas the participants in the control group did not receive any intervention. All participants completed the assessment three times: before, after, and tracking.
RESULTS: The results showed that the total score and the scores of all subscales of aggression dropped significantly (P