Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29284467›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

Satisfaction of doctors with their training: evidence from UK.

Simon Gregory, Chiara Demartini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. How are trainees in clinical microbiology and infectious diseases supervised in Europe? An international cross-sectional questionnaire survey by the Trainee Association of ESCMID.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018
    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

2 authors.

Simon GregoryHealth Education England, London, England.
Chiara DemartiniDepartment of Economics and Management, University of Pavia, Via S. Felice, 5/7, 27100, Pavia, Italy. mariachiara.demartini@unipv.it.ORCID 0000-0003-0017-0926

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study considers the primary training environment factors affecting the satisfaction of doctors in training with their training.

methodsAn OLS multiple regression analysis was performed on responses given by doctors in training (trainees) to General Medical Council (UK) National Trainee Survey annually from 2012 to 2015. Two different research models investigate the determinant of trainee doctor satisfaction. The first model includes clinical supervision, feedback, workload, and gender as explanatory variables. The second model adds supportive environment to the first model.

resultsThe GMC survey response rate is 97%. Our analysis shows the key factors that determine trainee satisfaction are strong clinical supervision, frequent and useful feedback meetings, an adequate workload and a supportive environment.

conclusionsIt is suggested focus on clinical supervision, feedback, workload and supportive environment would increase trainee satisfaction, improve the quality of training and morale, and hopefully, therefore, the quality of care patients receive.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalPersonal SatisfactionFeedbackFemaleHumansMalePhysiciansRegression AnalysisState MedicineSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomWorkloadFeedbackNHSSupervisionSupportive environmentTraining satisfactionWorkload

Identifiers

PMID29284467
PMCPMC5747190

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.