ArticleF1000Research2015
CPIRD: A successful Thai programme to produce clinically competent medical graduates.
Article in F1000Research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring long-term retention intention and influencing factors among rural-oriented medical students in primary care in Guangxi, China: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Assessment of dropout rates in the preclinical years and contributing factors: a study on one Thai medical school.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Article
- A Checklist for Implementing Rural Pathways to Train, Develop and Support Health Workers in Low and Middle-Income Countries.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
- Global variability in orthopedic surgery training.Orthopedic reviews · 2019Article
- Perception of educational environment among medical students in Thailand.International journal of medical education · 2018Article
- CPIRD: A successful Thai programme to produce clinically competent medical graduates.F1000Research · 2015Article
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
The programme titled "Collaborative Project to Increase Production of Rural Doctors" (CPIRD) is a rural medical education project launched in 1994 in Thailand. This study aimed to compare the academic performances in medical study over five years and the pass rates in national medical license examinations (MLE) between students enrolled in CPIRD and two other tracks. Grade point average (GPA) over five years and results of MLEs for four cohorts of students enrolled from 2003 to 2006 in Prince of Songkla University were collected from the registration department. A longitudinal analysis was used to compare the GPA over time for medical students enrolled in CPIRD and those from the national and direct regional tracks through generalized estimating equation (GEE) models. The MLE pass rates were compared using chi-square and fisher's exact tests as appropriate. Female students dominated the CPIRD group. GPAs in the first three years in the CPIRD group were significantly lower than those of the other two groups, this disparity narrowed in the fourth and fifth years. For step one of the MLE (basic sciences), cohorts 2003 and 2006 of the CPIRD group had a significantly lower pass rate than the other two groups but there was no significant difference in cohort 2004 and cohort 2005. The CPIRD step two and three MLE pass rates were not significantly different from the national track in all cohorts and lower than the direct track only for step two in cohort 2003 and step three in cohort 2006. The step three pass rate of the CPIRD group in cohort 2004 was significantly higher than the other two tracks. Despite weaker competency in basic science, the CPIRD was successful in forming clinical competency.
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.