ArticleSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2014
[Medical educational evaluation of the German Pain Congress 2012. In the context of the CanMEDS physician competency framework].
Article in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving competence and safety in pain medicine: a practical clinical teaching strategy for students combining simulation and bedside teaching.BMC medical education · 2021Article
- [Cross-sectional field pain medicine Q14 - the Mainz model : Development of the pain medicine curriculum in the standard study course at the University Medical School of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2017Article
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
backgroundProfessionals in the medical field are expected to participate in continuing medical education in the sense of lifelong learning. The authors took this occasion to evaluate the most important national convention in pain medicine concerning its role in medical education. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe participants of the 37th German Pain Congress (17-20 October 2012 in Mannheim) were asked to complete a questionnaire concerning content and design of the convention. The aim of this study was to analyze the distribution of different physician competencies in the program. For this purpose the congress program was analyzed with respect to the various medical role models as defined in the Canadian medical education directions for specialists (CanMEDS) framework.
resultsThe participants considered the quality of the different sessions of the German Pain Congress to be good. The poster sessions were considered to be the second most important educational format in the congress following the live sessions. Concerning the content of the congress the participants wished more emphasis on the role of interprofessional partners, such as nursing and psychotherapy. The CanMEDS physician roles of manager, communicator, health advisor and professional paragon were underrepresented in the congress program in this study.
conclusionRegarding content and educational value, the congress design could benefit from additional Praktikerseminaren (practical seminars). The role of interprofessional partners should be more emphasized. In addition the program could become more attractive through a more balanced distribution of the CanMEDS roles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25245595What 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.