Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20811730›Full record

ArticleDer Nervenarzt2010

[The quality of university teaching in psychiatry and psychotherapy: results of a survey on the current status following the introduction of the new medical accreditation system].

M Weih, J Kornhuber, F Hohagen, U Voderholzer

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2010. 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

4 authors.

M WeihPsychiatrische und Psychotherapeutische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Schwabachanlage 6, 91054, Erlangen, Deutschland. markus.weih@uk-erlangen.de
J Kornhuber
F Hohagen
U Voderholzer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The classic criticism levelled at German medical studies was addressed in 2002 with the reform of the German medical accreditation system. For the specialties Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, a national workshop of the German Society for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Neurology (DGPPN) was held in Heidelberg on 23.01.2004 to implement the new legal requirements for teaching. In 2008, a postal survey was conducted among the 36 German medical faculties by the DGPPN to establish the current status of the proposed implementation, with the general structure of undergraduate medical training, student-centered syllabuses and the general significance of teaching forming the main points. With a response rate of 75%, the results can be considered representative. In general, a cautiously positive conclusion can be drawn on the implementation of the medical accreditation system. Having said that, it should be borne in mind that implementation is not yet complete and still requires optimization, for example in terms of making examinations not only theoretical but also more practical in approach.

Indexed as

Educational MeasurementAccreditationData CollectionEducation, MedicalGermanyPsychiatryPsychotherapyStudents, Medical

Identifiers

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.