Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28962568›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2017

Facilitators of high-quality teaching in medical school: findings from a nation-wide survey among clinical teachers.

S Schiekirka-Schwake, S Anders, N von Steinbüchel, J C Becker, T Raupach

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 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

5 authors.

S Schiekirka-SchwakeDivision of Medical Education Research and Curriculum Development, Study Deanery of Göttingen Medical School, Göttingen, Germany. sarah.schiekirka@med.uni-goettingen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5711-0652
S AndersDepartment of Legal Medicine, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
N von SteinbüchelInstitute of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
J C BeckerDepartment of Medical Education, Medical Faculty, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
T RaupachDivision of Medical Education Research and Curriculum Development, Study Deanery of Göttingen Medical School, Göttingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical teachers in medical schools are faced with the challenging task of delivering high-quality patient care, producing high-impact research and contributing to undergraduate medical education all at the same time. Little is known on the gap between an 'ideal' environment supporting clinical teachers to provide high quality teaching for their students and the reality of clinical teaching during worktime in the clinical environment. Most quantitative research published so far was done in a wide range of medical educators and did not consider individual academic qualifications. In this study, we wanted to survey clinical teachers in particular and assess the potential impact of individual academic qualification on their perceptions.

methodsBased on qualitative data of focus group discussions, we developed a questionnaire which was piloted among 189 clinical teachers. The final web-based questionnaire was completed by clinical teachers at nine German medical schools.

resultsA total of 833 clinical teachers (569 junior physicians, 264 assistant professors) participated in the online survey. According to participants, the most important indicator of high quality teaching was "sustained student learning outcome" followed by "stimulation of interest in the subject matter". Lack of time was the main factor impeding effective teaching (78%). Among the factors facilitating high-quality teaching, protected preparation time during working hours (48%) and more recognition of high-quality teaching within medical schools (21%) were perceived as most helpful. Three out of four teachers (76%) were interested in faculty development programmes directed at teaching skills, but 60% stated they had no time to engage in such activities. With regard to evaluation, teachers preferred individual feedback (75%) over global ratings (21%). Differences between assistant professors and junior physicians were found in that the latter group perceived their teaching conditions as more difficult.

conclusionsLack of time is a major barrier against planning and delivering good clinical teaching in medical schools. According to our findings, the situation at German medical schools is particularly challenging for junior physicians. Creating an institutional culture in which teaching is regarded as highly as patient care and research is a prerequisite for overcoming the barriers identified in this study.

Indexed as

Faculty, MedicalAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelEducational PersonnelEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFemaleFocus GroupsGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysician-Patient RelationsPhysician's RolePilot ProjectsQualitative ResearchQuality of Health CareAcademic statusBarriersClinical teacherDidactic trainingEvaluationFacilitatorsFaculty developmentQuestionnaireSurveyUndergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID28962568
PMCPMC5622577

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.