Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28300734›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2017

Residency evaluation and adherence design study: Young ophthalmologists' perception of their residency programs II: Academics and Research dissertation.

Parikshit Madhav Gogate, Partha Biswas, Sundaram Natarajan, Barun Kumar Nayak, Santhan Gopal, Yogesh Shah, Samar K Basak

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Residency training in India: Time for a course correction.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2018
    Article
  7. Ophthalmology residency training in India:Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2017
    Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Parikshit Madhav GogateAll Ophthalmological Society, New Delhi; Padmashree Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College; Community Eye Care Foundation, Dr. Gogate's Eye Clinic, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Partha BiswasAll Ophthalmological Society, New Delhi; B B Eye Foundation, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Sundaram NatarajanAll Ophthalmological Society, New Delhi; Aditya Jyot Eye Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Barun Kumar NayakAll Ophthalmological Society, New Delhi; Department of Ophthalmology, Hinduja Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Santhan GopalAll Ophthalmological Society, New Delhi; Netradham Eye Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Yogesh ShahAll Ophthalmological Society, New Delhi; KamlaNethrlaya Eye Clinic and Surgical Centre, Banglore, Karnataka, India.
Samar K BasakAll Ophthalmological Society, New Delhi; Disha Eye Hospitals, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Aditya Jyot Eye Hospital · INCommunity Eye Care Foundation · INP. D. Hinduja Hospital and Medical Research Centre · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo know the perception of young ophthalmologists about their dissertation and academics during residency training in order to improve the research output during present residency programs in India.

methodsA survey was conducted by Academic and Research Committee of the All India Ophthalmological Society, the world's second largest ophthalmic professional's organization, in 2014-2016 of young ophthalmologists (those who completed residency between 2005 and 2012) to gauge usefulness of dissertation or thesis during postgraduate residency.

resultsThere were 1005 respondents, of whom 531 fulfilled inclusion criteria. On a scale of 0-10, residents rated level of supervision of their dissertation as adequate (mean 5.9/10, standard deviation [SD] = 3.1, median = 6). The level of infrastructure available was for dissertation rated as 5.9/10 (median = 7, SD = 3.1), and 6.2/10 was the score that residents said about value added by the dissertation (median = 7). The dissertation was presented at local (33.5%), state (28.1%), national (15.4%), and international (4%) levels. Students, not supervisors, did most of the local and state level presentations. It was published in some forms at local 210 (39.5%), state (140, 26.4%), national (94, 17.7%), and international (39, 7.3%) levels. On a scale of 0-4, seminars (3/4) and case presentations were (3/4) rated higher than didactic lectures (2.2/4), journal clubs (2.2/4), and wet laboratory (1.1/4).

conclusionPeer-reviewed publications from Indian residency training dissertations were few. Residents felt dissertation added value to their training, but there was a huge range among the responses. Journal clubs and wet laboratories were not graded high in academic programs, unlike seminars and case presentations.

Indexed as

Academic Dissertations as TopicClinical CompetenceAdultBiomedical ResearchEducation, Pharmacy, GraduateFemaleHumansIndiaInternship and ResidencyMaleMiddle AgedOphthalmologistsOphthalmologySurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID28300734
PMCPMC5369286
OpenAlexW2596302524

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.