ArticlePain reports
Ten years of interfaculty pain curriculum at the University of Toronto: impact on student learning.
Article in Pain reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDelivery of interprofessional pain education for prelicensure healthcare professionals is strongly recommended to advance a workforce ready for collaborative practice and to improve the quality and outcomes of pain care.
objectivesWe report a 10-year (2009-2019) longitudinal evaluation of a 20-hour undergraduate Interfaculty Pain Curriculum (IPC) delivered to students in the Faculties of Dentistry, Nursing, Pharmacy, and Medicine (also including the Departments of Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy and Physician Assistant) at the University of Toronto, Canada. The IPC follows a constructivist approach to facilitate interactive and multifaceted learning.
methodsEvaluation methods based on the Kirkpatrick model were used to appraise changes in participating students' pain knowledge and beliefs and their ability to collaboratively develop an interprofessional pain management plan.
resultsA total of 10,693 students participated over the 10-year study period. The mean annual attendance was 972 students and participation to the program increased significantly over the years. Overall, the IPC was effective in improving students' mean pain knowledge and beliefs scores; however, the mean knowledge score gains were negatively correlated with time, likely related to increased uniprofessional pain education. Although an increasing trend in mean interprofessional pain management plan scores was observed, the scores were not significantly correlated with time.
conclusionsThe interactive and multifaceted IPC is consistently effective in improving knowledge and beliefs and interprofessional pain management care plan development among participating student cohorts. Future inquiry is required to better understand the mechanisms behind student learning in interprofessional pain education to enhance pain curriculum development and delivery.
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.