ArticleSpartan medical research journal2018
Delivering the AAMC "Teaching for Quality" Program through a Community-Based GME Collaborative: Lessons Learned to Date.
Article in Spartan medical research journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Common Problematic Scholarly Activity Project Planning Expectations of Project Novices.Spartan medical research journal · 2021Article
- Practice Makes Better: Effective Faculty Educator Skill Development in the Virtual Space.Journal of graduate medical education · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextTo address scholarly activity (SA) accreditation standards, the Michigan State University's College of Osteopathic Medicine Statewide Campus System has offered the Association of American Medical Colleges' (AAMC) Teaching for Quality Program for two cohorts of community-based faculty. The purpose of this paper was to describe the design and delivery of the customized program, the authors' initial lessons learned, and their plans for further evaluation and dissemination.
methodsThe authors customized the program to overcome the barriers typically faced by community-based program faculty learners through a graduate medical education (GME) consortium model. This was the first time this program was delivered in this manner.
resultsThe authors' initial cohort of 19 learners successfully developed 15 projects, with two pairs of learners collaborating on projects. The second cohort of 15 learners developed 11 projects, with one pair of learners collaborating. The authors present a series of principles for community-based GME leaders striving to develop SA projects in their respective GME environments.
conclusionsThe "consortium advantage" derived from entities such as the SCS may prove integral to efficiently coordinating SA project resources and knowledge across diverse GME systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33655141PMC7746054What 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.