ArticleBMJ open2022
Programme of triple-I mediator education (TIME) to improve medical disputes in clinical settings in Taiwan: a Delphi study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo establish a training programme to cultivate trainee mediation skills through time investment, skill incorporation and formation of in-house mediation services.
designA four-round consensus conference was conducted by a number of seasoned experts selected in the manner of purposive sampling to determine core competences and relevant curricula through the modified Delphi process.
settingResponses collected from enrolled experts through four rounds of the Delphi process from 11 November 2018 to 17 May 2019.
participantsOnboard seasoned mediators with different specialties. OUTCOME MEASURES: Items with a median rating of 4 or more on a Likert scale of 1-7 points and 70% or more in agreement were identified as core competence and curricula.
resultsEleven enrolled experts reached the consensus about the training syllabus based on the 4-round agreement with four pillars of core competence, including 'knowledge base of law', 'internalisation of the denotative and connotative meanings of care', 'effective, smooth and timely communication' and 'conflict resolution'. To grasp the dynamics and diversity of medical disputes on target, it is necessary to have sufficient knowledge and skills. We arrange our course in the order of teaching materials with pure didactics in the former two and with mixed contents comprising lectures and field exercises in the rest two.
conclusionsThe sample developed a syllabus to train apprentices to take intermediate responses to medical disputes through the skills of conflict resolution and establishment of effective communication to improve the relationship between patients/relatives and medical staff, as a result of eventually reducing the conversion rate from dispute into litigation or alternative pathway. Policy-makers in healthcare and top management in healthcare institutions can use this syllabus to guide their future education and training programme.
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.