ReviewOman medical journal2021
Research Publications of the Oman Medical Specialty Board.
Review in Oman medical journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mixed-Methods Evaluation of Programmatic Interventions on Academic Performance and Resident Perspectives in Internal Medicine Residency.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo date, the quantity and the quality of research publications conducted within the Oman Medical Specialty Board (OMSB) have not been assessed. In this review, we sought to assess the quantity and quality of research publications affiliated with the OMSB.
methodsWe retrieved data systematically from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. We searched all publications published until December 2018.
resultsA total of 133 published articles affiliated with the OMSB were retrieved. Half of the publications were original studies, and 30.8% were case reports or series. Reviews and editorials represented 6.8% and 8.3%, respectively. Among the original studies, 79.4% were cross sectionals and 50.0% were retrospective in nature. Among the prospective studies, 58.8% were questionnaire-based surveys. The impact factors of the journals ranged between 0.82 and 4.40, except for one journal with an impact factor of 15.10.
conclusionsThe quantity and quality of the publications from the OMSB is still low. However, training and policy change in the residency curriculum is key to improve the status.
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.