ArticleBMC medical education2024
Evaluation of FamMed essentials: a blended-learning program for capacity building of general practitioners in Pakistan.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo provide access to primary care and universal health coverage, Pakistan requires 60,000 trained family physicians by 2030. At present, most primary care is provided by general practitioners (GPs) who do not have any post-graduate training. Empowering GPs through competency-based programs, that strengthen their knowledge and skills, may be a cost-effective strategy for improving healthcare quality. We describe the development and evaluation of FamMed Essentials, a modular, blended-learning program to improve clinical knowledge and skills of GPs.
methodsThis is a mixed method study. We used the CIPP (content, input, process and product) framework for course development and evaluation. We describe the steps used in content development, strategies for teaching and assessments, and evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of the program. In depth focus group discussions were conducted to gather insight on participants' and faculty's perceptions regarding the program's effectiveness.
resultsOf the 137 participants who have completed the program, 72% were women and 49% had been practicing for more than five years. We saw a significant improvement in knowledge across all modules (p = < 0.001) and perceived confidence in clinical skills (p = < 0.001). An objective assessment showed participants' competence in patient management. Participants reported a high level of satisfaction (4.4 ± 0.83 on a 5-point Likert Scale). Focus group discussions revealed a positive impact on clinical practice. Flexibility and use of different teaching and learning strategies were additional strengths. In addition, participants reported an interest in further training. Power outages were highlighted as a major challenge.
conclusionIn resource-constrained health systems, a modular, blended-learning, competency-based program is helpful to upgrade GPs knowledge without impacting their busy schedules. Accreditation of such programs and provision of a career trajectory for the trained GPs are pivotal to expansion of such initiatives.
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.