Background Peer evaluation can provide valuable feedback to medical students, and increase student confidence and quality of work. The objective of this systematic review was to examine the utilization, effectiveness, and quality of peer feedback during collaborative learning in medical education. Methods The PRISMA statement for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analysis was used to guide the process of conducting the systematic review. Evaluation of level of evidence (Colthart) and types of outcomes (Kirkpatrick) were used. Two main authors reviewed articles with a third deciding on conflicting results. Results The final review included 31 studies. Problem-based learning and team-based learning were the most common collaborative learning settings. Eleven studies reported that students received instruction on how to provide appropriate peer feedback. No studies provided descriptions on whether or not the quality of feedback was evaluated by faculty. Seventeen studies evaluated the effect of peer feedback on professionalism; 12 of those studies evaluated its effectiveness for assessing professionalism and eight evaluated the use of peer feedback for professional behavior development. Ten studies examined the effect of peer feedback on student learning. Six studies examined the role of peer feedback on team dynamics. Conclusions This systematic review indicates that peer feedback in a collaborative learning environment may be a reliable assessment for professionalism and may aid in the development of professional behavior. The review suggests implications for further research on the impact of peer feedback, including the effectiveness of providing instruction on how to provide appropriate peer feedback.

Team-based learning (TBL) helps instructors develop an active teaching approach for the classroom through group work. The TBL infrastructure engages students in the learning process through the Readiness Assessment Process, problem-solving through team discussions, and peer feedback to ensure accountability. This manuscript describes the benefits and barriers of TBL, and the tools necessary for developing, implementing, and critically evaluating the technique within coursework in a user-friendly method. Specifically, the manuscript describes the processes underpinning effective TBL development, preparation, implementation, assessment, and evaluation, as well as practical techniques and advice from authors' classroom experiences. The paper also highlights published articles in the area of TBL in education, with a focus on pharmacy education.

Background: It is difficult to predict the risk of falling, especially in patients with good motor ability, and the mechanisms underlying the relation between gait patterns and falling in Parkinson’s disease (PD) remain unclear. We investigated factors related to falling, including walking speed and time, in patients with Hoehn-Yahr stage III PD. Methods: We performed clinical assessments and evaluated balance in 30 patients with PD. Information on falling was obtained from questionnaires and personal interviews. Gait patterns were analyzed with the use of an originally designed, suddenly narrowed path. Results: Gait velocity was slower in fallers than in non-fallers (p = 0.047). Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale part II (UPDRS part II) score, fear of falling, and gait velocity were significantly related to falling on analysis with a single logistic model. When a multiple logistic model was used, the UPDRS part II score was significantly related to falling (OR: 1.48, p = 0.037, 95% CI: 1.02–2.16). Conclusions: Patients with Hoehn-Yahr stage III PD showed slow gait velocity attributed to fear of falling before arrival at a narrowed entrance or while walking on a narrowed path. The UPDRS part II score is significantly related to the risk of future falls.

Acupuncture is safe and well tolerated in patients with PD. Most patients reported subjective improvement. The BDI and PDQ-39 total score, measuring depression and quality of life, demonstrated some improvement, but UPDRS motor scores worsened.

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Hallucinations and psychosis are common in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), with reported prevalences of up to 48% and 80%, respectively. However, few randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating the treatment options have appeared in the literature. The studies that have been published were complicated by lack of agreement on the diagnosis of psychosis in PD, poor completion rates, mixed populations that included dementia, and other issues. Several reviews, guidelines, and consensus statements have sought to establish standards for treating these symptoms of PD. In 2006, the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) published a practice guideline (based on articles published up to 2004) for management of depression, psychosis, and dementia in patients with PD. Since then, a number of relevant studies have been published. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article was to review data that have appeared in the literature since publication of the AAN guideline regarding the management of hallucinations and psychosis in PD. METHODS: A literature search of the PubMed, CINAHL, and PsychInfo databases was conducted for human studies published in English from January 2004 to June 2010. All clinical studies were included except case reports and case series. Studies with <20 participants were also excluded. Search terms included psychosis, hallucinosis, hallucination, delusion, Parkinson, atypical antipsychotic, neuroleptic, aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in the review: 3 studies of clozapine, 7 studies of quetiapine, 2 head-to-head trials comparing quetiapine and clozapine, and 1 noncomparative trial of clozapine or quetiapine interventions. Most of the studies included participants with a mean age in the early to mid 70s and a mean duration of PD typically >10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Results of the identified studies suggested that patients with PD might benefit from long-term clozapine therapy. Results of the quetiapine studies were conflicting. However, no statistically significant difference in effectiveness was found between quetiapine and clozapine in comparative trials. The significance of the differences in treatment responses between patients with dementia and those without dementia remains unclear, and it was not possible to draw conclusions for or against other atypical antipsychotics because of insufficient evidence. Further studies are needed to address the methodologic issues in the current trials and to assess safety issues in larger cohorts. Eng, Marty L. and Welty, Timothy E. (1999) Management of Hallucinations and Psychosis in Parkinson's Disease. Am J Geriat Pharm. 8(4), 316-330. PMID: 20869621. Publisher's official version: