How Often is Digital Rectal Examination Performed? Is it Still Taught to Medical Students?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Digital rectal examination is an essential skill. However, it is not clear how often it is performed by AUA (American Urological Association) members or if it is still taught in medical school. METHODS: Two web based surveys were administered to AUA members (practicing urologists and residents/fellows) and medical student members of the AUA. The surveys inquired how often digital rectal examination was performed, when and how it was taught, and how the AUA could promote it. RESULTS: There were 331 responses from AUA members and 160 responses from medical students. Most (64%) AUA members performed digital rectal examination on at least 50% of male patients. When respondents were subdivided according to the median age of 36 years, AUA members older than 36 years performed significantly more routine digital rectal examinations while those 36 years old or younger relied significantly more on prostate specific antigen screening (p <0.001). While few medical schools had a mandatory urology rotation, 89% of students reported that digital rectal examination was a required component of their medical school education and it was taught during the second year. While 81% of medical students were aware of the AUA Medical Student Curriculum only 43% of them were aware that the AUA has videos instructing students on digital rectal examination. Finally, AUA members and students provided insight as to how the AUA could promote digital rectal examination. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the importance and general attitude of AUA members and students toward the digital rectal examination. In the future the AUA could further develop clinical guidelines, content and educational videos with particular emphasis on augmenting medical student education on digital rectal examination.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".