Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32560652›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2020

Development and maintenance of a medical education research registry.

Jeffrey A Wilhite, Lisa Altshuler, Sondra Zabar, Colleen Gillespie, Adina Kalet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

5 authors.

Jeffrey A WilhiteDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, NYU Robert I. Grossman School of Medicine, 462 1st Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA. Jeffrey.Wilhite@nyulangone.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4096-8473
Lisa AltshulerDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, NYU Robert I. Grossman School of Medicine, 462 1st Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Sondra ZabarDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, NYU Robert I. Grossman School of Medicine, 462 1st Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Colleen GillespieDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, NYU Robert I. Grossman School of Medicine, 462 1st Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Adina KaletDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, NYU Robert I. Grossman School of Medicine, 462 1st Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA.

Funding

HRSA HHS D54HP05446
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical Education research suffers from several methodological limitations including too many single institution, small sample-sized studies, limited access to quality data, and insufficient institutional support. Increasing calls for medical education outcome data and quality improvement research have highlighted a critical need for uniformly clean and easily accessible data. Research registries may fill this gap. In 2006, the Research on Medical Education Outcomes (ROMEO) unit of the Program for Medical Innovations and Research (PrMEIR) at New York University's (NYU) Robert I. Grossman School of Medicine established the Database for Research on Academic Medicine (DREAM). DREAM is a database of routinely collected, de-identified undergraduate (UME, medical school leading up to the Medical Doctor degree) and graduate medical education (GME, residency also known as post graduate education leading to eligibility for specialty board certification) outcomes data available, through application, to researchers. Learners are added to our database through annual consent sessions conducted at the start of educational training. Based on experience, we describe our methods in creating and maintaining DREAM to serve as a guide for institutions looking to build a new or scale up their medical education registry.

resultsAt present, our UME and GME registries have consent rates of 90% (n = 1438/1598) and 76% (n = 1988/2627), respectively, with a combined rate of 81% (n = 3426/4225). 7% (n = 250/3426) of these learners completed both medical school and residency at our institution. DREAM has yielded a total of 61 individual studies conducted by medical education researchers and a total of 45 academic journal publications.

conclusionWe have built a community of practice through the building of DREAM and hope, by persisting in this work the full potential of this tool and the community will be realized. While researchers with access to the registry have focused primarily on curricular/ program evaluation, learner competency assessment, and measure validation, we hope to expand the output of the registry to include patient outcomes by linking learner educational and clinical performance across the UME-GME continuum and into independent practice. Future publications will reflect our efforts in reaching this goal and will highlight the long-term impact of our collaborative work.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchEducation, Medical, GraduateEducation, Medical, UndergraduateEvidence-Based MedicineProgram DevelopmentHumansRegistriesGraduate medical educationMedical educationMedical education researchResearch registryUndergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID32560652
PMCPMC7305610

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.