ArticleGMS Zeitschrift fur medizinische Ausbildung2014
Clerkship in primary care: a cross-sectional study about expectations and experiences of undergraduates in medicine.
Article in GMS Zeitschrift fur medizinische Ausbildung, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- General practitioners' and students' experiences with feedback during a six-week clerkship in general practice: a qualitative study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWith the amendment of the medical licensure act (Approbationsordnung) in 2012, a four-week clerkship in primary care (FHV) became mandatory. We investigated the expectations with which students begin the FHV, which criteria are relevant in selecting the location for the FHV, and the experiences the students had during the FHV.
methodIn a cross-sectional study, all third-year students at both medical schools in Saxony-Anhalt were surveyed in 2013 about their expectations and experiences regarding the FHV. This is the last cohort for which the FHV is optional. Questions were asked about 29 items addressing six topics (personal information, selection of FHV location, selection of FHV medical practice, expectations, experiences, and specialty selection).
resultsOut of a student body of 446, responses were received from N=424 (response rate 95.1%; of which 61.8% female). Of these students, 71 (16.7%) had completed the FHV and 70 (16.5%) were planning to; another 267 students (63%) had not (yet) planned to participate in an FHV. Where a student's parents lived, personal recommendations of a particular medical practice and the attractiveness of the region were the most important criteria for selecting the clerkship site. After completing the FHV, the learning objectives reflected themselves in the experiences of the students in a similar order and significance as in the expectations of students who planned or had not (as of yet) planned to complete the FHV. A relevant influence of the FHV confirming the choice to specialize in general practice or outpatient care was not indicated by those who had completed the FHV.
conclusionAfter location and practice, the FHV is selected according to personal criteria and in connection with prioritized learning objectives. From the students' perspective, the most frequently named learning objectives are also identified as acquired experience after completing the FHV. However, the FHV does not have a reinforcing effect on the selection of general practice as a specialty.
Indexed as
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.