Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28549464›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2017

Is the delivery of a quality improvement education programme in obstetrics and gynaecology for final year medical students feasible and still effective in a shortened time frame?

Bridget Kool, Michelle R Wise, Roshini Peiris-John, Lynn Sadler, Faith Mahony, Susan Wells

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Bridget KoolSection of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. b.kool@auckland.ac.nz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2537-4688
Michelle R WiseDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Roshini Peiris-JohnSection of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Lynn SadlerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Faith MahonySection of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Susan WellsSection of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTeaching clinical audit skills to nascent health professionals is one strategy to improve frontline care. The undergraduate medical curriculum at the University of Auckland provides improvement science theory and skills in Year 5 teaching, and the opportunity to put this into practice during an Obstetrics and Gynaecology (O&G) clinical attachment in Year 6. In 2015, a revised medical school curriculum at the university resulted in a planned reduction of the O&G attachment from five weeks to four, necessitating revision of the Year 6 Quality Improvement (QI) project. The aim of this study was to evaluate if the revised programme provided an important experiential learning opportunity for medical students without imposing an unsustainable burden on clinical services.

methodsBased on a CIPP (Context/Input/Process/Product) evaluation model, the study was conducted in several stages to get a sense of the context as the new programme was being planned (Context evaluation), the feasibility of an alternative approach to meet the educational need (Input evaluation), the implementation of the revised programme (Process evaluation) and finally, the programme outcomes (Product evaluation). We used multiple data sources (supervisors, students, academic administrators, and hospital staff) and data collection methods (questionnaires, focus groups, individual interviews, consultative workshops, student reports and oral presentations).

resultsThe context evaluation revealed the Year 6 QI programme to be valuable and contributed to O&G service improvements, however, the following concerns were identified: time to complete the project, timely topic selection and access to data, recognition of student achievement, and staff workload. The evaluation of the revised QI project indicated improvement in student perceptions of their QI knowledge and skills, and most areas previously identified as challenging, despite the concurrent reduction in the duration of the O&G attachment.

conclusionsApplying the CIPP model for evaluation to our revised QI programme enabled streamlining of procedures to achieve greater efficiency without compromising the quality of the learning experience, or increasing pressure on staff. A four week clinical rotation is adequate for medical educators to consider opportunities for including QI projects as part of student experiential learning.

Indexed as

Quality ImprovementStudents, MedicalCross-Sectional StudiesEducation, MedicalFeasibility StudiesFemaleGynecologyHumansMaleObstetricsSurveys and QuestionnairesClinical auditMedical educationQuality improvementUndergraduates, Medical

Identifiers

PMID28549464
PMCPMC5446706

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.