ArticlePloS one2022
Developing evidence-based resources for evaluating postgraduate trainees in the biomedical sciences.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Training Socially-Conscious Dentists: Development and Integration of Community Service-Learning in Dental Curricula in Ontario, Canada.International dental journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Postgraduate trainees elevate the academic strength of institutions by conducting research, promoting innovation, securing grant funding, training undergraduate students, and building alliances. Rigorous and systematic program evaluation can help ensure that postgraduate training programs are achieving the program's intended outcomes. The purpose of this project was to develop evidence-based evaluation tools that could be shared across federally funded biomedical training programs to enhance program evaluation capacity. This manuscript describes the evidence-based process used to determine program evaluation needs of these programs at a research-intensive university. Using a multi-phased sequential exploratory mixed methods approach, data were collected from trainees, employers, leaders, and program directors. Data analyses included document analysis of program plans, inductive coding of focus groups and interviews, and descriptive analysis of surveys. Two overarching categories-Trainee Skills and Program Characteristics-were identified including six themes each. Program directors prioritized communication, social and behavioral skills, and collaboration as the trainee skills that they needed the most help evaluating. Furthermore, program directors prioritized the following program characteristics as those that they needed the most help evaluating: training environment, trainee outcomes, and opportunities offered. Surveys, interview scripts, and related resources for the categories and themes were developed and curated on a publicly available website for program directors to use in their program evaluations.
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.