ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2018
Residents' Ratings of Their Clinical Supervision and Their Self-Reported Medical Errors: Analysis of Data From 2009.
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 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Serious safety events as a window into clinical learning environment dynamics: A qualitative situational analysis.Medical education · 2026Article
- Explicating practice norms and tensions between values in resident training in family medicine.BMC family practice · 2020Article
- Supervision and autonomy of ophthalmology residents in the outpatient clinic in the United States II: a survey of senior residents.BMC medical education · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical errors and patient safety are major concerns for the medical and medical education communities. Improving clinical supervision for residents is important in avoiding errors, yet little is known about how residents perceive the adequacy of their supervision and how this relates to medical errors and other education outcomes, such as learning and satisfaction.
methodsWe analyzed data from a 2009 survey of residents in 4 large specialties regarding the adequacy and quality of supervision they receive as well as associations with self-reported data on medical errors and residents' perceptions of their learning environment.
resultsResidents' reports of working without adequate supervision were lower than data from a 1999 survey for all 4 specialties, and residents were least likely to rate "lack of supervision" as a problem. While few residents reported that they received inadequate supervision, problems with supervision were negatively correlated with sufficient time for clinical activities, overall ratings of the residency experience, and attending physicians as a source of learning. Problems with supervision were positively correlated with resident reports that they had made a significant medical error, had been belittled or humiliated, or had observed others falsifying medical records.
conclusionsAlthough working without supervision was not a pervasive problem in 2009, when it happened, it appeared to have negative consequences. The association between inadequate supervision and medical errors is of particular concern.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.