Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11217629›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2001

A continuous curriculum for general practice? Proposals for undergraduate-postgraduate collaboration.

R Jones, N Oswald

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

R JonesDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, Guy's, King's and St Thomas's School of Medicine, 5 Lambeth Walk, London SE11 6SP. roger.jones@kcl.ac.uk
N Oswald

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of a seamless general practice 'spiral' curriculum, in which topics may be revisited at different levels of intensity and complexity during the learning process, has been discussed in the context of undergraduate-postgraduate co-operation. Although the lifelong curriculum for all doctors contains a number of core competencies that aim to produce a 'stem' doctor, concerns remain about the effects of excessive reductionism. It is therefore essential that the content and delivery of the spiral curriculum ensure that intellectual interest is nurtured, by containing both taught theory and training in a hospital context. The opportunity for generalists to teach core competencies such that general practice is at the centre of the undergraduate curriculum--emphasising working within primary health care teams in teaching and training practices--is an ideal area for undergraduate-postgraduate co-operation. The use of the directly observed measures of performance would bring the undergraduate approach to assessment closer to that used in postgraduate general practice. However, supporting the tutors' network is crucial in undergraduate departments where much can be gained by joint working with postgraduate colleagues.

Indexed as

CurriculumEducation, Medical, ContinuingEducation, Medical, GraduateEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFamily PracticeHumansInterprofessional RelationsUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID11217629
PMCPMC1313931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.