ArticleJournal of advances in medical education & professionalism2021
Pathology of General Practice Curriculum from the Viewpoint of Students and Professors.
Article in Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism, 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.
- Disparities in educational service quality among medical students in Iran's revised medical curriculum: A cross-sectional study in a resource-limited region.Journal of education and health promotion · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBased on the needs of the health system, continuous revising and monitoring are essential for General Practice (GP) Curriculum. The present study was conducted to investigate the diseases of GP Curriculum based on the students' and professors' viewpoints.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was carried out at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences in 2018. A total of 80 GP students of internship and 71 professors of the faculty of medicine in clinical and basic science disciplines were enrolled in the study using quota and convenience sampling methods, respectively. Two self-made, reliable, and validated 4-point scale questionnaires (ranging from totally agree to totally disagree) were used to collect the data on the viewpoints of students and professors on the diseases of GP curriculum. The mean score and percentage of agreement between professors and students on the incidence of each disease were calculated.
resultsThe highest and lowest rates of agreement between the professors and students in terms of the presence of curriculum diseases belonged to the echolalia curriculum with a mean and standard deviation of 1.92±0.68 and the dean denial with a mean and standard deviation of 2.0±6.68, respectively. The results showed a statistically significant difference between the viewpoints of professors and students regarding the diseases of the carcinoma of the curriculum (P<0.001), idiopathic colitis (P<0.001), the schizophrenia of the curriculum (P=0.01), and echolalia curriculum (P=0.01).
conclusionThe present study showed that professors and students were all in agreement about 12 out of 13 diseases of the GP curriculum. Thus, educational planners in Iran's medical schools should focus on the continuous evaluation and the necessity of curriculum revision, as one of the priorities of the educational system.
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.