ArticleYonago acta medica2019
Training in the Departments of Urology and Surgery for Gynecologists in Japan.
Article in Yonago acta medica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Urology Coverage for Obstetric and Gynecological Operative Procedures Should Go Hand in Hand in a Hospital Setting.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe authors wanted to understand the current situation concerning Japanese obstetricians' and gynecologists' ideas for and against training in other departments.
methodsWe sent questionnaires to obstetrics and gynecology (Ob-Gyn) specialists via a social networking service (SNS) in Japan. They answered anonymously using Google Forms over the internet.
resultsThe respondents comprised 120 Ob-Gyn specialists, and their age ranges of 28-29, 30-39, 40-49, and 50 or more, were 5.8%, 73.3%, 15.8%, and 5.0%, respectively. Only five Ob-Gyn specialists (4.2%) had experience in other departments, specifically gastrointestinal and urology. Ninety percent of them responded that they thought training in other departments was useful for developing clinical and surgical skills. In addition, 91.0% of respondents thought that surgical knowledge and skills were necessary in the clinical practice of gynecology, while 94% stated training in urology was also necessary. However, 49.2% of respondents answered that they may feel stress training in other departments where there were many issues, including a lack of personnel and difficulties securing cases.
conclusionMany Ob-Gyn specialists think training in other departments is necessary, but potential problems include proper training implementation and stress management for residents. If additional training is enforced, greater flexibility in each facility will be required.
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.