ArticleIrish journal of medical science2022
Is it feasible to learn research skills in addition to audit skills through clinical audit? A mixed methods study in general practice.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInvolving medical students in research in their undergraduate careers may increase the likelihood that they will be research active after graduation. To date, there has been a paucity of published research of students doing research in general practice.
aimThe study aims to evaluate the impact of general practice clinical audits on early-stage graduate entry students' audit and research self-efficacy and explore feasibility issues from the student and GP perspective.
methodsTwo student questionnaires (pre- and post-intervention), a qualitative GP survey of the 25 participating GPs and semi-structured interviews of a purposeful sample of GPs were conducted.
resultsParticipating students who completed the follow-up survey found that it had a positive educational impact (55%), increased their understanding of the audit cycle (72%) and real-world prescribing (77%). Research confidence wise, there was a statistically significant difference in the student group who completed the audit project compared to those students who did not in knowledge of the audit cycle and the difference between research and audit (p = 0.001) but not in other research skills. Ninety-six percent of responding GPs would be happy for students to do future audits in their practice but some feasibility issues similar to other research initiatives in general practice were identified.
conclusionWe found this audit initiative feasible and useful in helping students learn about audit skills, patient safety and real-world prescribing. GPs and students would benefit more if it were linked to a substantial clinical placement, focussed on a topic of interest and given protected time. Separate research projects may be needed to develop research skills confidence.
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.