ArticleCMAJ open
An entrustable professional activity descriptor for medical aid in dying: a mixed-methods study.
Article in CMAJ open. 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.
- Development of learning objectives for a medical assistance in dying curriculum for Family Medicine Residency.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- How is the medical assistance in dying (MAID) process carried out in Nova Scotia, Canada? A qualitative process model flowchart study.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Development of a Canadian Medical Assistance in Dying Curriculum for Healthcare Providers.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn jurisdictions where medical aid in dying (MAiD) is legal, there is an obligation to ensure the competence of those who assess eligibility and provide MAiD to patients. Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are one framework for incorporating competency-based training and assessment into the workplace, so we convened a group of experienced MAiD providers to develop an EPA descriptor for MAiD.
methodsWe performed a mixed-methods sequential qualitative (focus group via 2 teleconferences) and quantitative (survey) study to generate and refine a consensus descriptor using open coding followed by a modified Delphi approach. Participants were experienced MAiD assessors and providers identified purposively from a national community of practice in Canada.
resultsOf the 22 MAiD assessors and providers invited to participate in the focus group, 13 (59%) agreed. The focus group divided MAiD into 3 components: assessment, preparation and provision of MAiD. Participants identified key knowledge, skills and attitudes for each component. They also suggested teaching approaches, potential sources of information to evaluate progress and a potential basis for evaluating progress and entrustment. Key points from this descriptor were sent via survey to 88 assessors and providers, of whom 64 (73%) responded. Respondents agreed on all key points except for the conditions of entrustment; these were modified based on feedback and sent back to the respondents for a second Delphi round, where agreement was achieved.
interpretationWe achieved a high degree of agreement on a competency-based descriptor of MAiD in the form of an EPA. This can be used to inform practice standards, curriculum development and/or assessment of competence among learners and practising providers alike.
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.