Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35783081›Full record

ArticleAEM education and training2022

Program evaluation: An educator's portal into academic scholarship.

Shera Hosseini, Yusuf Yilmaz, Kaushal Shah, Michael Gottlieb, Christine R Stehman, Andrew K Hall, Teresa M Chan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AEM education and training, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Shera HosseiniFaculty of Health Sciences McMaster Institute for Research on Aging McMaster Education Research, Innovation, and Theory McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada.
Yusuf YilmazMcMaster Education Research, Innovation and Theory (MERIT) Program & Office of Continuing Professional Development Faculty of Health Sciences McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4378-4418
Kaushal ShahDepartment of Emergency Medicine Weill Cornell Medical School New York New York USA.
Michael GottliebDepartment of Emergency Medicine Rush University Medical Center Chicago Illinois USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3276-8375
Christine R StehmanDepartment of Emergency Medicine University of Illinois College of Medicine - Peoria/OSF Healthcare Peoria Illinois USA.
Andrew K HallDepartment of Emergency Medicine University of Ottawa Ottawa Ontario Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1227-5397
Teresa M ChanFaculty of Health Sciences McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6104-462X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Program evaluation is an "essential responsibility" but is often not seen as a scholarly pursuit. While Boyer expanded what qualifies as educational scholarship, many still need to engage in processes that are rigorous and of a requisite academic standard to be labelled as scholarly. Many medical educators may feel that scholarly program evaluation is a daunting task due to the competing interests of curricular change, remediation, and clinical care. This paper explores how educators can take their questions around outcomes and efficacy of our programs and efficiently engage in education scholarship. The authors outline how educators can examine whether training programs have a desired impact and outcomes, and then how they might leverage this process into education scholarship.

Identifiers

PMID35783081
PMCPMC9222891

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.