ArticleTurkish journal of emergency medicine2018
Emergency medicine physicians' perspectives on subspecialty training: A national survey.
Article in Turkish journal of emergency medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intensive care subspecialty in turkey: what do emergency medicine physicians think?Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Trends in medical students' career choice of emergency medicine: A 14-year study.Turkish journal of emergency medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSubspecialty training (sST) is an accepted educational model for the branches that have completed the maturation period. At the end of a rapid growth and reaching its limits, we wanted to determine the emergency medicine (EM) physicians' thoughts about subspecialty training in EM in Turkey.
methodThis is a national cross-sectional survey study conducted in November 2017. Participants were physicians who were receiving or who had completed emergency medicine education.
resultsThe response rate was 32% (n = 607) in the study. The rate of attending physicians was 45.1%, resident physicians were 40.2%, and academic staff were 14.7%. Among all the EM physicians, 85.2% noted the need for sST, 9.6% were uncertain about the need, and 5.3% found the need unnecessary. The most frequently requested trainings were toxicology (72.5%), traumatology (71.3%), and critical care (67.4%). After sST, 48.9% of EM physicians requested to work both in the emergency department and in the other relevant department, 36.1% requested to work full-time in the emergency department, and 14.9% requested to work full-time in the other relevant department.
conclusionThe great majority of EM physicians believed in the need for sST in Turkey. There were two primary reasons for wanting to apply for sST: first, and most frequently, was the contribution to advanced training, and second, was avoiding problems in the daily practice of EM.
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.