ReviewNeurogastroenterology and motility2016
Competency based medical education in gastrointestinal motility.
Review in Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gastroenterology Fellow Knowledge of Esophageal Motility and Manometry: Assessment and Improvement Initiative at an Academic Center.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Implementation and Analysis of a 5-Year Online Esophageal Motility Curriculum for Gastroenterology Fellows.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024Article
- Esophageal Manometry Competency Program Improves Gastroenterology Fellow Performance in Motility Interpretation.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2020Article
- New Developments in Esophageal Motility Testing.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Assessing an assessment: The review and redesign of a competency-based mid-degree evaluation.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2018Article
- A System to Assess the Competency for Interpretation of Esophageal Manometry Identifies Variation in Learning Curves.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2017Article
- High-resolution esophageal manometry: interpretation in clinical practice.Current opinion in gastroenterology · 2017Review
- Benchmarks for the interpretation of esophageal high-resolution manometry.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2017Article
- Training in Gastrointestinal Motility.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Traditional apprenticeship-based medical education methods focusing on subjective evaluations and case-volume requirements do not reliably produce clinicians that provide high-quality care in unsupervised practice. Consequently, training approaches are shifting towards competency based medical education, which incorporates robust assessment methods and credible standards of physician proficiency. However, current gastroenterology and hepatology training in the US continues to utilize procedural volume and global impressions without standardized criteria as markers of competence. In particular, efforts to optimize competency based training in gastrointestinal (GI) motility are not underway, even though GI motility disorders account for nearly half of outpatient gastroenterology visits. These deficiencies compromise the quality of patient care. Thus, there is a great need and opportunity to shift our focus in GI motility training towards a competency based approach. First, we need to clarify the variable rates of learning for individual diagnostic tests. We must develop integrated systems that standardize training and monitor physician competency for GI motility diagnostics. Finally, as a profession and society, we must create certification processes to credential competent physicians. These advances are critical to optimizing the quality of GI motility diagnostics in practice.
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.