ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2014
Success of a Faculty Development Program for Teachers at the Mayo Clinic.
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- VA Boston Healthcare System First Friday Faculty Development Presentation Series.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2019Article
- A framework for faculty development programming at VA and non-VA Academic Medical Centers.Journal of regional medical campuses · 2018Article
- Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Core Competencies at a Community Teaching Hospital: Is There a Gap in Awareness?The Permanente journal · 2016Article
- Students' perspective of bedside teaching: A qualitative study.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere has been limited research on the improvement of underperforming clinical teachers.
objectiveTo determine whether a faculty development program could improve the evaluations of clinical teachers in an internal medicine residency program.
methodsA total of 123 teachers completed faculty development at the Mayo Clinic from 2009 to 2012. The faculty enhancement and education development program (FEED) consists of 6 interactive, small group, 2-hour sessions taught by experienced Mayo Clinic faculty over 1 year. These sessions address the following competencies: asking questions, diagnosing learners, giving feedback, using teaching frameworks, recognizing learning styles, and providing clinical supervision. Resident-of-faculty Mayo teaching effectiveness (MTE) scores have previously demonstrated content, internal structure, and criterion validity. Teachers were grouped into the top 80% or the bottom 20%, according to baseline MTE scores. Mixed linear models were used to compare these groups regarding changes in MTE scores after completion of FEED. Results were adjusted for teacher age, sex, medical specialty, academic rank, and teaching awards.
resultsFor all participants combined, the adjusted MTE scores (mean; standard error) improved from baseline (3.80; 0.04) to completion of FEED (3.93; 0.04; P < .001). However, the bottom 20% had a significantly greater improvement in scores than the top 80% (score-change difference = 0.166, P < .001).
conclusionsWe describe a low-intensity faculty development intervention that benefited all clinical teachers, but was particularly effective for underperforming teachers in internal medicine. The approach may be suitable for adoption or adaptation in other graduate medical education programs.
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.