Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31943311›Full record

ArticleJournal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine2020

The Canadian Medical Student Ultrasound Curriculum: A Statement From the Canadian Ultrasound Consensus for Undergraduate Medical Education Group.

Irene W Y Ma, Peter Steinmetz, Kirstin Weerdenburg, Michael Y Woo, Paul Olszynski, Claire L Heslop, Stephen Miller, Gillian Sheppard, Vijay Daniels, Janeve Desy and 11 more

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

Irene W Y MaDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7580-0171
Peter SteinmetzDepartment of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4937-4516
Kirstin WeerdenburgDepartment of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, IWK Health Center and Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Michael Y WooDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Ottawa and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Paul OlszynskiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3102-5652
Claire L HeslopDivision of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Stephen MillerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Skilled Clinician Program, Undergraduate Medical Education, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Gillian SheppardDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, Newfoundland, Canada.
Vijay DanielsDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Janeve DesyDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Maxime ValoisDepartment of Emergency Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Luke DevineDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Heather CurtisDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Michael J RomanoDivision of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5205-7912
Patrick MartelDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Center, North Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Tomislav JelicDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Claude ToppingDepartments of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Laval University, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.
Drew ThompsonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Barbara PowerDepartment of Medicine, Education, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Jason ProfettoDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Pete TonsethDepartment of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study sought to establish by expert review a consensus-based, focused ultrasound curriculum, consisting of a foundational set of focused ultrasound skills that all Canadian medical students would be expected to attain at the end of the medical school program.

methodsAn expert panel of 21 point-of-care ultrasound and educational leaders representing 15 of 17 (88%) Canadian medical schools was formed and participated in a modified Delphi consensus method. Experts anonymously rated 195 curricular elements on their appropriateness to include in a medical school curriculum using a 5-point Likert scale. The group defined consensus as 70% or more experts agreeing to include or exclude an element. We determined a priori that no more than 3 rounds of voting would be performed.

resultsOf the 195 curricular elements considered in the first round of voting, the group reached consensus to include 78 and exclude 24. In the second round, consensus was reached to include 4 and exclude 63 elements. In our final round, with 1 additional item added to the survey, the group reached consensus to include an additional 3 and exclude 8 elements. A total of 85 curricular elements reached consensus to be included, with 95 to be excluded. Sixteen elements did not reach consensus to be included or excluded.

conclusionsBy expert opinion-based consensus, the Canadian Ultrasound Consensus for Undergraduate Medical Education Group recommends that 85 curricular elements be considered for inclusion for teaching in the Canadian medical school focused ultrasound curricula.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalCanadaClinical CompetenceCurriculumHumanscurriculumeducationpoint of careultrasoundundergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID31943311
PMCPMC7317450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.