ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2020
[Analysis of European concepts for specialization training in urology with special consideration of intersectoral further education].
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Certified residency curriculum for the specialization training in urology from the German Society of Urology according to the 2018 Training Regulations (version of 20. September 2019)].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2020Article
- [German model specialty training regulations (MWBO) urology: taking a closer look].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2020Article
- [Transsectoral continuing education in urology-what is it actually?]Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the study is to compare the German specialization training in urology with other European concepts, to analyze regional differences and to evaluate the development of the personnel structure in urology in German hospitals and private practices for the last 5 years. In addition, possibilities for financial funding of residents in the outpatient sector will be analyzed. MATERIALS AND
methodsAfter analyzing the changes in the new Urology Specialization Training Regulations (Musterweiterbildungsordnung), the current urology training situation in Germany was evaluated in a European comparison. A trend analysis of the personnel structure in urology has been performed for recent years. Additionally, a possible intersectoral rotation concept was developed. Financial funding possibilities for urological residents were evaluated in a standardized telephone survey.
resultsCompared to other European countries, the exceptional position of German urology with its enormous spectrum becomes evident. In some states, there are already possibilities of financial support provided by regional Associations of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (Krankenversicherung) for the training of urological residents in private practices.
conclusionsWhile the organization of specialization training is commonly nation based in other European countries, there is heterogeneity in Germany due to the sovereignty of the states. Due to the shift of many specialization training contents towards the outpatient sector, alliances between clinics and practices in the sense of intersectoral training will become more important in the future. Therefore, the use of already existing funds and-as a long-term objective-a nationwide access to such funding is desirable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32691108What 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.