ArticleIrish journal of medical science2019
Satisfaction of the Irish Trauma and Orthopaedic training programme with the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical training has undergone extensive changes in recent years. The Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme (ISCP) has been utilised in the UK for many years to facilitate the education and assessment of trainees. It was adopted by the Irish Trauma and Orthopaedics (T&O) training programme in July 2015. This study sought to evaluate the use satisfaction with ISCP in the Irish context.
methodsA total of 58 T&O trainers and trainees undertook a paper-based survey during national training days in March and April 2017.
resultsEighty-nine percent of trainees responded to the survey along with 85% of trainers. Seventy-nine percent of respondents had been using ISCP for over a year. Most aspects of ISPC were rated as average, with the induction process, online multi-source feedback (MSF) and overall user friendliness rating poorly amongst respondents. Seventeen percent felt that ISCP had a positive impact on training, while 66% felt that it did not adversely affect their training opportunities. Forty-three percent reported a negative impact on the trainer-trainee relationship with adoption of ISCP and only 24% felt that the educational feedback was improved with the new system. Forty-two percent agreed that ISCP created a more structured and supervised framework to the training scheme.
conclusionsOur survey demonstrated significant concerns and reservations amongst the Irish users of ISCP. The demonstrable level of trainee dissatisfaction with ISCP may represent a frustration that key problems such as the regulated training content of jobs remains unaddressed while ISCP does little to improve meaningful formative feedback.
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.