Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29467971›Full record

ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2018

Arlene Chung, Nicole Battaglioli, Michelle Lin, Jonathan Sherbino

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Arlene Chung
Nicole Battaglioli
Michelle Lin
Jonathan Sherbino
University of California, San Francisco · USIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USMayo Clinic Health System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysician well-being is garnering increasing attention. In 2016, the

objectiveWe summarized an asynchronous, online journal club discussion about this systematic review and highlighted themes that were identified in the review.

methodsIn January 2017,

resultsOver the first 14 days, the blog post was viewed 1070 unique times across 52 different countries. A total of 130 unique participants on Twitter posted 480 tweets using the hashtag #JGMEscholar. Thematic analysis revealed 5 major domains: the multidimensional nature of well-being, measurement of well-being, description of wellness programs and interventions, creation of a culture of wellness, and critique of the methodology of the review.

conclusionsOur online journal club highlighted several gaps in the current understanding of resident well-being, including the need for consensus on the operational definition, the need for effective instruments to evaluate wellness programs and identify residents in distress, and a national research collaboration to assess wellness programs and their impact on resident well-being.

Indexed as

Internship and ResidencyPeriodicals as TopicSocial MediaEducation, Medical, GraduateEmergency MedicineHealth PromotionHumansPhysicians

Identifiers

PMID29467971
PMCPMC5821003
OpenAlexW2772122211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.