ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2022
Faculty Competencies: An Exploration of Feasibility and Acceptance.
Article in PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A global 'Common Core' framework for family medicine faculty development: Getting the right person, doing the right thing, right!African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: A uniform method of iterative professional development for medical educators does not exist in the United States graduate medical education system. The Society of Teachers of Family Medicine Faculty Competencies Special Project Team, a subgroup of the Faculty Development Collaborative, sought to create a competency-based assessment framework for medical educators. This paper describes the feasibility and acceptance of a draft competencies resource using a survey. Methods: A mixed-methods, ten-question survey to assess the feasibility and acceptance of the draft competencies resource was created and distributed to medical educators through educational contacts from October 2019 to November 2019. Results: Eighty-six surveys were completed. Of the 86 respondents, 48 (55%) answered all the survey questions. Thematic analysis for acceptance of the draft yielded three groups, the accepting, neutral, and nonacceptance groups. Each group had distinct characteristics regarding the likelihood of accepting and using the draft competencies. Conclusions: The draft competencies are thought to be feasible, with overall acceptance in the current form. Further research will guide revisions of the competency resource before final distribution.
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.