ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2020
Self-assessment of medical students and young physicians in training : Self-confidence of clinical competencies and working or learning environment.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Student self-assessment: feasibility, advantages and limitations; example of a workshop for trainee surgeons using a suture score.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Self-directed learning in post-graduate medical education: Self-judgement and supervisor judgement of competence development in Austrian nine-month basic training.GMS journal for medical education · 2024Article
- Modelling the Effect of Age, Semester of Study and Its Interaction on Self-Reflection of Competencies in Medical Students.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Training outcomes for audiology students using virtual reality or traditional training methods.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2015 medical training regulations have been restructured for postgraduate medical training in Austria resulting in a significant shortening of the training period. Furthermore, a restriction of working hours for physicians to 48 h per week was implemented affecting the framework of postgraduate medical training. The aim of this study was to obtain a self-assessment of students and young physicians in Austria regarding their self-confidence in clinical skills and their working and learning environment.
methodsIn this study 6th year medical students, physicians in their basic training (common trunk), physicians in family medicine training, and residents in their first 18 months of training were asked to participate in a survey. Self-reported data were collected for five different prespecified domains (communication, motor skills, knowledge, documentation, and emergency).
resultsIn all domains, self-confidence increased significantly during medical training. Analysis further revealed better results of residents compared with all other groups in all domains, whereas physicians in family medicine training only rated themselves better in the documentation domain (p = 0.010); however, the interest in family medicine was low, even among physicians in family medicine training. The workload significantly increased during medical education, with the highest stress levels for physicians in family medicine training and residents (p = 0.001).
conclusionsSelf-confidence of young physicians but also their stress levels increased during the medical training. Further studies are needed to answer the question why the interest in family medicine was so unexpectedly low in this cohort.
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.