ArticleCJC open2024
Designing a Multidisciplinary Cardio-obstetrics Curriculum for General Cardiology and Obstetrics Residents: A National Survey of Educational Needs.
Article in CJC open, 2024. 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 National Survey of Cardiologists on Scope of Practice, Knowledge Gaps, and Educational Priorities in Adult Congenital Heart Disease Care in Canada.CJC pediatric and congenital heart disease · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The increasing and potentially preventable cardiac events in pregnant patients have led to calls to enhance multidisciplinary cardio-obstetrics education. To design a multidisciplinary cardio-obstetrics curriculum for general cardiology and obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residents, we need to define educational needs from the perspectives of both cardiology and OBGYN residents. Our study characterizes the educational needs of Canadian cardiology and OBGYN residents. Methods: Canadian cardiology and OBGYN residents were surveyed on clinical exposures, perceived needs for topics, unperceived needs for topics (multiple-choice questions) and preferences for educational formats. High priorities were defined as ≥ 50% of responses indicating a perceived need or ≥ 50% indicating an unperceived need. Results: A total of 154 residents participated (cardiology n = 44, OBGYN n = 110). Residents reported insufficient clinical exposure to nearly all cardiac disorders, with 33% of exposures occurring in multidisciplinary contexts. All topics aside from gestational hypertension were rated as high priority on perceived needs by both specialties. High-priority unperceived needs were congenital heart disease (both specialties), pre-existing acquired heart disease (both specialties), medication safety (OBGYN), peripartum management (OBGYN), and pregnancy-related heart disease (OBGYN). Cardiology and OBGYN residents shared preferences for in-person simulation, virtual simulation, and online modules. Conclusions: Residents in both specialties reported low clinical exposure to most cardiac disorders during pregnancy, identified high-priority perceived needs in multiple topics, and shared 2 high-priority unperceived needs. OBGYN residents identified 3 additional high-priority unperceived needs. These data can inform design of multidisciplinary cardio-obstetrics curricula for general cardiology and OBGYN residents.
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.