The Effects of Various Teaching Methods on Chest X-ray Interpretation Skills Among Medical Students and Interns: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Chest X-ray (CXR) is a common tool used in medical practice. Medical students and interns should acquire knowledge of CXR interpretation, as it is an essential diagnostic tool for a large spectrum of diseases. This systematic review aimed to compare the effect of different intervention techniques on the competency of medical students and interns to demonstrate the level of confidence and competence in interpreting common presentations of CXRs. The population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) framework was used to formulate the review question. All related articles in five databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, and Embase) were retrieved and the search was completed in March 2023 with no limiters on date and time. The number of relevant studies was 469. A multi-level approach through the Rayyan platform was used for the screening and exclusion processes. Eleven articles were included in the systematic review consisting of eight randomized controlled trials, one quasi-experimental study, one cross-sectional study, and one interventional cohort. Results showed significant effects of teaching methods utilizing deductive or inductive approach, clinical history, patient care comfort survey, and SAFMEDS (Say-All-Fast-Minute-Every-Day-Shuffled). Contrarily, no significant effect was shown by flipped classroom models and mixed and blocked practice, peer-assisted learning vs. expert-assisted learning, and Chester, an artificial intelligence tool. This review identified beneficial approaches that may enhance the learning outcomes of interpreting CXRs for medical students and interns, highlighting the remarkable impact of SAFMEDS on medical students' ability to identify CXR findings as well as the availability and practicality of online and e-learning resources for students.

Keywords: chest x-ray; chest x-ray interpretation; medical students; pico framework; rayyan platform; systematic review.

Figure 1. Flowchart of the literature search selection and screening strategy

** Non-medical students, animal studies, non-chest X-rays, e.g., CT, MRI, and ultrasound, non-educational, and studies that do not measure competency.