Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26968519›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2016

A mixed methods approach to developing and evaluating oncology trainee education around minimization of adverse events and improved patient quality and safety.

Anna Janssen, Tim Shaw, Lauren Bradbury, Tania Moujaber, Anne Mette Nørrelykke, Jessica A Zerillo, Ann LaCasce, John Patrick T Co, Tracy Robinson, Alison Starr and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Gamification of health professions education: a systematic review.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Anna JanssenResearch in Implementation Science and e-Health Group (RISe), Faculty of Health Sciences, Sydney West Translational Cancer Research Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. anna.janssen@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6611-9651
Tim ShawResearch in Implementation Science and e-Health Group (RISe), Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Lauren BradburyCrown Princess Mary Cancer Care Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Tania MoujaberCrown Princess Mary Cancer Care Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Anne Mette NørrelykkeCrown Princess Mary Cancer Care Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Jessica A ZerilloDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Ann LaCasceDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
John Patrick T CoPartners HealthCare, Boston, MA, USA.
Tracy RobinsonFaculty of Health, Disciplines of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Alison StarrWestern Sydney Local Health District, Westmead, NSW, Australia.
Paul HarnettCrown Princess Mary Cancer Care Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdverse events are a significant quality and safety issue in the hospital setting due to their direct impact on patients. Additionally, such events are often handled by junior doctors due to their direct involvement with patients. As such, it is important for health care organizations to prioritize education and training for junior doctors on identifying adverse events and handling them when they occur. The Cancer Cup Challenge is an educational program focuses on quality improvement and adverse event awareness targeting for junior oncology doctors across three international sites.

methodsA mixed methodology was used to develop and evaluate the program. The Qstream spaced learning platform was used to disseminate information to participants, as it has been demonstrated to impact on both knowledge and behavior. Eight short case based scenarios with expert feedback were developed by a multidisciplinary advisory committee containing representatives from the international sites. At the conclusion of the course impact on participant knowledge was evaluated using analysis of the metrics collected by the Qstream platform. Additionally, an online survey and semi-structured interviews were used to evaluate engagement and perceived value by participants.

resultsA total of 35 junior doctors registered to undertake the Qstream program, with 31 (88.57 %) successfully completing it. Analysis of the Qstream metrics revealed 76.57 % of cases were answered correctly on first attempt. The post-program survey received 17 responses, with 76.47 % indicating cases for the course were interesting and 82.35 % feeling cases were relevant. Finally, 14 participants consented to participate in semi-structured interviews about the program, with feedback towards the course being generally very positive.

conclusionsOur study demonstrates that an online game is well accepted by junior doctors as a method to increase their quality improvement awareness. Developing effective and sustainable training for doctors is important to ensure positive patient outcomes are maintained in the hospital setting. This is particularly important for junior doctors as they are working closely with patients and learning skills and behaviors, which will influence their practice throughout their careers.

Indexed as

Patient SafetyQuality ImprovementCurriculumEducational MeasurementFemaleGames, ExperimentalHumansMaleMedical ErrorsMedical OncologyTeaching

Identifiers

PMID26968519
PMCPMC4788878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.