ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2013
Optimizing the implementation of practice improvement modules in training: lessons from educators.
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe American Board of Internal Medicine approved the use of Practice Improvement Modules (PIMs) to help training programs teach and assess practice-based learning and improvement (PBLI) and systems-based practice (SBP).
methodsWe surveyed individuals who ordered a PIM in a residency or fellowship training program between June 2006 and August 2009. The 43 programs that volunteered to participate completed a 30-minute anonymous online survey.
resultsProgram directors or associate program directors led the PIM process in 30 programs (70%). Trainees' degrees of involvement in PIMs were highly variable between programs, and several respondents felt that trainees were either not sufficiently engaged or not engaged with enough consistency. The most common activity for trainee involvement was data collection through patient surveys or chart review, although only 17 programs (40%) provided protected time for this activity. Few trainees participated in higher level activities such as data analysis or identification for areas of improvement or were given leadership roles; yet most respondents reported that completing the PIM helped trainees learn basic principles of QI and develop competence in PBLI and SBP and that PIM completion improved the program's ability to develop QI initiatives and resulted in program or institutional improvements, including sustainable improvement in patient care. Most respondents reported that the outcome warranted the effort to complete PIMs.
conclusionsPIMs may be a valuable but underused educational experience for trainees as well as training programs. Focusing on particular themes and facets of PIMs may facilitate implementation.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.