Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23595929›Full record

Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2013

Moving forward in GME reform: a 4 + 1 model of resident ambulatory training.

Saima I Chaudhry, Sandy Balwan, Karen A Friedman, Suzanne Sunday, Basit Chaudhry, Deborah Dimisa, Alice Fornari

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. X+Y Scheduling in Psychiatry Training.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. An Interactive Ambulatory Nephrology Curriculum for Internal Medicine Interns: Design, Implementation, and Participant Feedback.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2017
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Saima I ChaudhryDivision of Hospital Medicine, North Shore LIJ Health System, Great Neck, NY, USA. schaudhr@nshs.edu
Sandy Balwan
Karen A Friedman
Suzanne Sunday
Basit Chaudhry
Deborah Dimisa
Alice Fornari
Northwell Health · USHofstra University · USCollege of Westchester · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraditional ambulatory training models have limitations in important domains, including opportunities for residents to learn, fragmentation of care delivery experience, and satisfaction with ambulatory experiences. New models of ambulatory training are needed.

aimTo compare the impact of a traditional ambulatory training model with a templated 4 + 1 model.

settingA large university-based internal medicine residency using three different training sites: a patient-centered medical home, a hospital-based ambulatory clinic, and community private practices.

participantsResidents, faculty, and administrative staff. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Development of a templated 4 + 1 model of residency where trainees do not attend to inpatient and outpatient responsibilities simultaneously. PROGRAM EVALUATION: A mixed-methods analysis of survey and nominal group data measuring three primary outcomes: 1) Perception of learning opportunities and quality of faculty teaching; 2) Reported fragmentation of care delivery experience; 3) Satisfaction with ambulatory experiences. Self-reported empanelment was a secondary outcome. Residents' learning opportunities increased (p = 0.007) but quality of faculty teaching was unchanged. Participants reported less fragmentation in the care residents provide patients in the inpatient and outpatient setting (p < 0.0001). Satisfaction with ambulatory training improved (p < 0.0001). Self-reported empanelment also increased (p < 0.0001). Results held true for residents, faculty, and staff at all three ambulatory training sites (p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: A 4 + 1 model increased resident time in ambulatory continuity clinic, enhanced learning opportunities, reduced fragmentation of care residents provide, and improved satisfaction with ambulatory experiences. More studies of similar models are needed to evaluate effects on additional trainee and patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareAmbulatory Care FacilitiesData CollectionEducation, Medical, GraduateHumansInternal MedicineInternship and ResidencyPatient-Centered CarePrivate PracticeProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID23595929
PMCPMC3710374
OpenAlexW2018708392

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.