Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18492128›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2008

Undergraduate preparation for prescribing: the views of 2413 UK medical students and recent graduates.

Amy Heaton, David J Webb, Simon R J Maxwell

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 121 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
121citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–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

121 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

61 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Amy HeatonClinical Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK.
David J Webb
Simon R J Maxwell

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo gather opinions from UK medical students and recent graduates about their undergraduate training to prescribe and their confidence about meeting the relevant competencies identified by the General Medical Council (GMC).

methodsWe designed a web-based survey that was distributed to UK medical students and first year Foundation doctors (graduation years 2006-2008) via medical schools and postgraduate networks.

resultsAnalysis was restricted to 2413 responses from students graduating in 2006-2008 from the 25 UK medical schools (mean 96.5 per school) with a complete undergraduate curriculum. Distinct courses and assessments in 'clinical pharmacology & therapeutics (or equivalent)' were identified by 17% and 13%, respectively, with mode of learning described most commonly as 'opportunistic learning during clinical attachments' (41%). Only 38% felt 'confident' about prescription writing and only a minority (35%) had filled in a hospital prescription chart more than three times during training. The majority (74%) felt that the amount of teaching in this area was 'too little' or 'far too little', and most tended to disagree or disagreed that their assessment 'thoroughly tested knowledge and skills' (56%). When asked if they were confident that they would be able to achieve the prescribing competencies set out by the GMC, 42% disagreed or tended to disagree, whereas only 29% agreed or tended to agree.

conclusionsMany respondents clearly perceived a lack of learning opportunities and assessment related to the safe and effective use of drugs and had little confidence that they would meet the competencies identified by the GMC. There is an urgent need to review undergraduate training in this area.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceCurriculumDrug PrescriptionsEducation, Medical, UndergraduateHumansMedical Staff, HospitalStudents, MedicalSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID18492128
PMCPMC2485268

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.