ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2021
Stages of Milestones Implementation: A Template Analysis of 16 Programs Across 4 Specialties.
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Residents' and preceptors' perceptions on newly introduced milestones-a qualitative study in general practice/family medicine in Finland.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Program Effects as a Source of Construct-Irrelevant Variance in ACGME Milestone Ratings.Journal of graduate medical education · 2025Article
- Investigating the Roles and Impact of Clinical Competency Committees in Graduate Medical Education: A Narrative Review.Journal of graduate medical education · 2024Review
- Introduction to the Milestones 2.0: Assessment, Implementation, and Clinical Competency Committees Supplement.Journal of graduate medical education · 2021Article
- Cost and Challenges of Clinical Competency Committees and Milestones Assessment.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum.2022
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince 2013, US residency programs have used the competency-based framework of the Milestones to report resident progress and to provide feedback to residents. The implementation of Milestones-based assessments, clinical competency committee (CCC) meetings, and processes for providing feedback varies among programs and warrants systematic examination across specialties.
objectiveWe sought to determine how varying assessment, CCC, and feedback implementation strategies result in different outcomes in resource expenditure and stakeholder engagement, and to explore the contextual forces that moderate these outcomes.
methodsFrom 2017 to 2018, interviews were conducted of program directors, CCC chairs, and residents in emergency medicine (EM), internal medicine (IM), pediatrics, and family medicine (FM), querying their experiences with Milestone processes in their respective programs. Interview transcripts were coded using template analysis, with the initial template derived from previous research. The research team conducted iterative consensus meetings to ensure that the evolving template accurately represented phenomena described by interviewees.
resultsForty-four individuals were interviewed across 16 programs (5 EM, 4 IM, 5 pediatrics, 3 FM). We identified 3 stages of Milestone-process implementation, including a resource-intensive early stage, an increasingly efficient transition stage, and a final stage for fine-tuning.
conclusionsResidency program leaders can use these findings to place their programs along an implementation continuum and gain an understanding of the strategies that have enabled their peers to progress to improved efficiency and increased resident and faculty engagement.
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.