ArticleFemale pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery2022
Effect of COVID-19 on Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery Fellowship Education and Training.
Article in Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery, 2022. 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.
- Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
importanceThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused a noticeable disruption in national medical and surgical care, including medical training.
objectivesWe designed a survey to examine the educational effect of the pandemic on female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery (FPMRS) training and secondarily to identify areas for innovation and opportunity in FPMRS fellowship training. STUDY
designWe used an online survey, approved by the American Urogynecologic Society Scientific Committee and distributed it to FPMRS fellows with responses obtained and stored in REDCap. Demographic data, educational and surgical experiences, the implications of the changes, and data regarding working from home were collected.
resultsThe survey was completed by 88 fellows, with 92% of respondents being obstetrics and gynecology- based. All 10 geographic regions had at least one response. Six regions had a 50% or greater redeployment rate. Only 16% of respondents were not redeployed or on-call to be redeployed. Eighty-five percent of the ob/gyn fellow redeployments were within their home department. There was no relationship between training region and redeployment. Only 31.7% of the respondents continued to perform any FPMRS surgery. Approximately 35% of the fellows desired the opportunity for surgical simulation training because surgical cases were reduced.No relationship was seen between either redeployment status and needs (P = 0.087-0.893) or difficulties (P = 0.092-0.864) nor training location and needs (P = 0.376-0.935) or difficulties (P = 0.110-0.921).
conclusionsThere was a high rate of redeployment among fellows; however, this was not associated with their reported needs and difficulties. The FPMRS-related surgical experience was affected during this time, and the fellows desired increased surgical simulation training.
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.