ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2018
Using Appreciative Inquiry to Inform Program Evaluation in Graduate Medical Education.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exodontia Block Course Evaluation: A Review of the Learning Outcomes, Content, and Assessment Practices at a Dental Faculty in South Africa.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- Building a Better Clinical Competency Committee: A Multi-Institutional Approach to Improving the Quality of Resident Feedback Through Appreciative Inquiry.HCA healthcare journal of medicine · 2026Article
- Implementing Strengths-Based, Positive Approaches Within Rheumatology Fellowship Training: A Realist Evaluation of Appreciative Inquiry-Based Interventions.Journal of clinical rheumatology : practical reports on rheumatic & musculoskeletal diseases · 2025Article
- Getting the Evaluation Focus Clear: A Shared Understanding of What Is Being Evaluated.Journal of graduate medical education · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGraduate medical education programs are expected to conduct an annual program evaluation. While general guidelines exist, innovative and feasible approaches to program evaluations may help efforts at program improvement. Appreciative Inquiry is an approach that focuses on successful moments, effective processes, and programs' strengths.
objectiveWe implemented a novel application of Appreciative Inquiry and its 4 phases (Inquire, Imagine, Innovate, and Implement) and demonstrate how it led to meaningful improvements in a pediatric pulmonology fellowship program.
methodsAs part of the Inquire and Imagine phases, the authors developed an interview guide that aligned with Appreciative Inquiry concepts. Two faculty members conducted semistructured interviews with a convenience sample of 11 of 14 fellowship alumni. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and reviewed. A summary of the findings was presented to the Program Evaluation Committee, which then directed the Innovate and Implement phases.
resultsAppreciative Inquiry was acceptable to the alumni and feasible with the authors' self-directed learning approach and minimal administrative and financial support. In the Inquire phase, alumni identified program strengths and successes. In the Imagine phase, alumni identified program changes that could aid transition to independent practice for future fellows (an identified program goal). Based on the results of the Appreciative Inquiry, program leadership and the Program Evaluation Committee selected improvements for implementation.
conclusionsFor small programs, Appreciative Inquiry is an innovative and feasible approach to program evaluation that facilitates actionable program improvement recommendations.
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.