ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2013
Building capacity for quality: a pilot co-learning curriculum in quality improvement for faculty and resident learners.
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. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the implementation of a longitudinal cocurricular experiential quality improvement training programme for undergraduate medical students.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Article
- Common Problematic Scholarly Activity Project Planning Expectations of Project Novices.Spartan medical research journal · 2021Article
- QIPS CURE: Implementing a Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Curriculum and Resident Experience.Journal of graduate medical education · 2020Article
- Delivering the AAMC "Teaching for Quality" Program through a Community-Based GME Collaborative: Lessons Learned to Date.Spartan medical research journal · 2018Article
- The Statewide Campus System Scholarly Activity Developmental Planning Framework for Community-Based GME Leaders.Spartan medical research journal · 2018Article
- Teaching Quality Improvement in Emergency Medicine Training Programs: A Review of Best Practices.AEM education and training · 2017Article
- Piloting a patient safety and quality improvement co-curriculum.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2017Review
- Examination of Resident Physician Quality Improvement/Patient Safety Project Confidence Levels from Multiple Programs.Spartan medical research journal · 2016Article
- Development of a Quality Improvement/Patient Safety Curriculum to Increase Emergency Medicine Resident Scholarly Activity.Spartan medical research journal · 2016Article
- Health Care Project Improvement Design: Proficiency Among University Faculty.American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical QualityArticle
- Mentoring Medical Students in Patient Safety and Quality Improvement: Exploring Faculty Confidence and Leadership.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite a mandate to teach quality improvement (QI) to residents, many training programs lack faculty capacity to deliver a QI curriculum.
objectiveWe piloted a co-learning curriculum in QI to train residents while simultaneously developing QI teachers. We evaluated the curriculum's acceptability and feasibility and its effect on faculty engagement in doing and teaching QI.
methodsThe curriculum involved 2 half-day, interactive sessions, a team-based QI project, and end-of-year project presentations. Key curriculum design principles included (1) residents and faculty co-attend all interactive sessions, (2) residents and faculty work together on team-based QI projects, and (3) QI projects align with divisional QI priorities. Using the Kirkpatrick framework for learner outcomes, we focused our program evaluation on Level 1 (satisfaction) and Level 2 (knowledge and skills acquisition) outcomes using year-end curriculum evaluations.
resultsOur study included 14 residents (70%) and 6 faculty members (30%). With respect to satisfaction (Kirkpatrick Level 1 outcome), 93% (13 of 14) of residents and 100% (6 of 6) of faculty participants rated the overall curriculum as "above average" or "outstanding." Regarding faculty knowledge and skills acquisition (Kirkpatrick Level 2 outcomes), faculty self-rated their QI knowledge and interest in QI higher than their intent to incorporate QI into future practice and their comfort in teaching or supervising QI projects. All 5 faculty respondents (100%) rated the co-learning model for faculty development in QI as "above average" or "outstanding."
conclusionsTeaching QI to residents and faculty as co-learners is feasible and acceptable and offers a promising model for programs to teach QI to residents while concurrently building faculty capacity.
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.