Rating of clinical skills texts for evidence-based approach
| Textbook | Discussion about diagnostic process | General discussion of accuracy and reliability | Accuracy of specific signs or symptoms provided | References provided | Relative frequency of disease or clinical finding | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| *Cells in which students’ rating prior to consensus differed from academics. Their initial rating for each of these 3 texts was “1”. | ||||||
| Rating Scale | ||||||
| 0—no mention of concept | ||||||
| 1—concept explained briefly, no examples given | ||||||
| 2—concept explained and some examples given | ||||||
| 3—concept consistently explained and applied throughout book. | ||||||
| Bates | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | Discusses evidence-based medicine and the diagnostic process |
| Davies | 0* | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | A brief primer rather than a textbook |
| Ogilvie & Evans | 0* | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0/1 | Good diagrams, tables and photographs |
| Larkins & Smallwood | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0/1 | Only 1 reference cited in entire book |
| Talley & O’Connor | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | Section correlating symptoms and signs with particular diseases |
| Munro & Campbell | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | Useful chapter conclusions on common pitfalls (v brief) |
| Lumley | 0* | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | Mention of prevalence of conditions and survival rates |
| Gray & Toghill | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | Tables on common and less common causes for some presentations |
| Swash & Hutchinson | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| Browse | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0/1 | Traditional surgical text disease-based approach |