ArticleBJGP open2022
An evaluation of a student-led career profiling project to support the exploration of a career in general practice and other specialties.
Article in BJGP open, 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.
- Improving the Appropriate Prescribing of Olanzapine for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Quality Improvement Initiative for the Outpatient Oncology Practice.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2025Article
- Rural family medicine as a career option among Hungarian medical students.The European journal of general practice · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChoosing medical careers is complex but the undergraduate period is formative. St George's University of London (SGUL) students called for greater careers information.
aimTo develop and evaluate students' careers resources. DESIGN &
settingA quality improvement student-staff project at SGUL, UK.
methodA 'Plan-Do-Study-Act' (PDSA) cycle was completed. For the 'Plan' element, students' career intentions and information preferences were surveyed. For the 'Do' element, video interviews with clinicians and infographic posters were produced and published on SGUL's virtual learning environment. For the 'Study' element, feedback questionnaires were thematically analysed using Kirkpatrick's framework. For the 'Act' element, the model was rolled out across SGUL programmes.
resultsIn the 'Plan' stage, 79 students ranked interest in specialties, with general practice being the second most popular. Students were unconfident in how to pursue careers and wanted more information. For the 'Do' element, 13 careers videos and infographics were created for 10 specialties. The 'Study' questionnaire showed changes across three of the four levels in Kirkpatrick's model of evaluation of training. Level 1 (Response): students found resources helpful and accessible. Level 2 (Learning): students reported increased understanding of careers. Level 3 (Transfer): students planned using checklists and made career comparisons by specialty. Level 4 (Results): students' career choices were not demonstrated, but there were tentative proxy measures such as copying and modelling career routes and choices. 'Act' involved rolling out and regularly updating resources.
conclusionThis PDSA model enabled development of resources by students mapped to students' needs. Changes were demonstrated in relation to students' response, learning, and transfer, with tentative suggestions of impact on career choice.
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.