ArticleBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
What do otolaryngologists want to learn? An educational targeted needs assessment study.
Article in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. 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.
- Subspecialty preferences and career plans among otorhinolaryngology residents in Türkiye: A national survey.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Evaluating Gaps in Otolaryngology Training: An In-Depth Needs Assessment in Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTargeted needs assessment which includes identifying the needs of learners is a key step of program development. However, this step is commonly underestimated in postgraduate medical education programs, including otolaryngology residency training. Determining the needs of otolaryngologists may help educators to design more purposeful continuing medical education training programs. Furthermore, needs of specialists may provide a clearer insight about effectiveness of the residency programs in that specialty.
objectiveTo determine training needs of otolaryngology specialists and to identify deficiencies in otolaryngology residency training programs.
methodsSeventy-eight otolaryngology specialists, who completed all data gathering forms properly, were included in this descriptive, cross-sectional study. Demographic data of the participants were collected. Training needs of the participants were determined in seven basic areas of otolaryngology via two-round Delphi method. The basic areas were otology-neurotology, rhinology, laryngology, head and neck surgery, pediatric otolaryngology, sleep disorders and facial plastic surgery. Additionally, we asked an open-ended question to investigate the reasons why the participants perceived themselves incompetent and undereducated, or why they needed further training in some of the basic otolaryngology areas.
resultsFacial plastic surgery, otology-neurotology and head and neck surgery were the most cited training areas in the needs assessment. Training needs differed according to experience and place of work. Financial expectations, deficiencies in residency training, regression in knowledge and skills, and special interest were effective determinants on decisions of the participants while determining their training needs.
conclusionOtolaryngologists need further training in some areas of their field due to different reasons. Determining these areas and reasons will help in designing more effective continuous medical education activities and residency training programs in otolaryngology.
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.