ArticleInternational journal of emergency medicine2024
Introduction of a formative assessment tool in a post-graduate training program in India: a mixed methods evaluation.
Article in International journal of emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOur institution has longstanding post-graduate education and training partnership programs in Emergency Medicine (EM) across India. A programmatic challenge has been the integration and uptake of evidence-based medicine and lifelong learning concepts. Formative assessment (FA) is intended to enable learners to monitor learning, identify strengths and weaknesses, and target areas of growth. As part of a program improvement initiative, we introduced an online FA tool to existing summative assessments. This study investigates how the FA tool was used and perceived by trainees.
methods246 trainees across 19 sites were given access to the FA tool. Usage metrics were monitored over 12 months. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in person with trainees using a purposive sampling methodology. A hybrid thematic analysis approach was used to determine themes. Interviews were coded independently by two blinded researchers using NVivo software. The study was deemed exempt by our institutional review board.
resultsThere was high variability in trainees' utilization of the FA tool. Trainees who used the FA tool more performed better on summative exams (r = 0.35, p < 0.001). Qualitative analysis revealed that trainees were motivated to learn for improved clinical knowledge and to be a good physician, not only passing exams. Benefits of the tool included the relationship to clinical practice and thorough explanation of answers, while disadvantages included topics unrelated to India.
conclusionThe integration of a FA tool has provided positive outcomes for trainees in EM education programs in India. Lessons learned may apply globally to other contexts and programs.
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.