Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34228143›Full record

ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2021

[New approbation regulations-new concepts in urological undergraduate training?]

C Siech, J König, L A Kluth

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

C SiechKlinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland. c.siech@gesru.de.
J KönigKlinik für Urologie, Asklepios Stadtklinik Bad Tölz, Bad Tölz, Deutschland.
L A KluthKlinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New research findings, changing health care structures and digitalisation are prompting further development of medical studies in Germany. The current amendment of the approbation regulations ("Ärztliche Approbationsordnung") focuses on the promotion of practical relevance and competence orientation of the course content and examinations, the redesign of the practical year and the expansion of general medicine in medical studies. This creates opportunities and challenges for urological training at the undergraduate level in Germany. In order to integrate basic scientific and clinical content, the existing curricula of the medical faculties must be adapted and further developed. There is an opportunity to implement innovative teaching and examination concepts in urological teaching and to attract the next generation of academics via scientific work in urology. In addition, the inclusion of teaching hospitals and outpatient areas can support university hospitals in urological training and show students the full range of the specialty. At the same time, given the limited time available for medical studies, there is the challenge of ensuring sufficient space for urology in the curricula. In order to fully implement the upcoming reform of medical studies, adequate financial and human resources are needed, as well as active commitment on the part of the teaching staff at the medical faculties.

Indexed as

CurriculumEducation, Medical, UndergraduateClinical CompetenceGermanyHumansStudentsContinuing educationDigitalizationLearning objectivesMedical educationPractical year

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.