Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36820021›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

The clinical task force: Improving quality of medical students' internship.

J J Baker, N Weis, T Boysen, M H Bestle, A G Andersen, A M Morcke, L Bremholm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

J J BakerDept of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
N WeisDept of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
T BoysenDept of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
M H BestleDept of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
A G AndersenDept of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
A M MorckeCentre for Educational Development, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
L BremholmDept of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Up to 40% of young medical doctors feel that the internships prepared them insufficiently for the clinical work. This study investigated whether a Clinical Task Force (CTF) could improve internship quality. Methods: The CTF visited internship departments with a triple-targeted approach: first, departments pre-filled a self-evaluating questionnaire; secondly, CTF visited departments to discuss the self-evaluation and previous student evaluations; and thirdly, CTF and departments agreed on several quality-improving focus points to work on after the meeting. Focus points were followed-up after three and 12 months. The impact on internship quality was assessed with departments' student evaluation scores, number of completed focus points, and the effect of completed focus points on a range of learning parameters. The CTF learned several things along the way, that potentially could affect the quality of internships. A shortlist of these was provided to illustrate unmeasurable benefits. Results: The CTF met with 53 out of 60 eligible departments. The CTF and departments agreed upon 197 focus points of which 64% were completed. The three most frequent categories of focus points were Introduction of the students, The departments' evaluation percentage, and The departments' function as an educational site. The mean student evaluation scores did not change significantly, but the individual evaluation parameters changed significantly in two categories. It decreased in the category regarding the students' satisfaction with the clinical lecturers and the scheduled teaching and increased in the category regarding the percentage of students evaluating the department. Conclusion: The CTF's triple-targeted approach did not increase the mean student evaluation score significantly. For departments that completed the agreed focus points, one category increased and another decreased. However, the unmeasurable benefits illustrated that CTF was a good viable linking element between the faculty, departments, and students with the potential of improving other aspects of the quality of internships.

Indexed as

EvaluationInternshipLearning pointsMedical studentsQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID36820021
PMCPMC9937950

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.