ReviewBMC medical education2024
Developing a responsive model to societal needs in medical education.
Review in BMC medical education, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResponsiveness is relevant in the context of treatment and the provision of medical services. However, if we delve deeper into the subject, we must establish and develop responsiveness within the medical sciences education system. This study aims to identify the dimensions that significantly impact responsiveness in the medical education system based on a comprehensive review and expert opinions in healthcare.
methodsThe present research is descriptive-analytical in terms of its objective and follows a mixed-method approach. This study was conducted in three stages. Initially, we utilized relevant keywords related to education in databases, such as Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect, OVID, CINHAL, EBSCO, Google Scholar, Iranmedex, SID, and Irandoc. Subsequently, in the expert panel session stage, the factors influencing responsiveness were identified in the comprehensive review stage, and with this thematic background, they were conceptualized. Finally, the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) technique was employed to coherently examine the relationships between variables and present the final model.
resultsWe obtained 32 articles from the comprehensive review of studies. Four components in planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, and intersectoral cooperation were identified based on expert panel opinions. Based on the standardized coefficients, the components of research-based educational planning, community-oriented education evaluation indicators, and utilization of modern educational methods are statistically significant.
conclusionThe establishment and development of responsiveness in the medical sciences education system involve training specialized and responsive human resources through innovative educational methods that have sufficient familiarity with the multidimensional concepts of health and how to achieve them. This approach allows for practical and responsible steps toward training competent and committed physicians in line with the needs of society. On the other hand, responsiveness in the medical sciences education system can be improved by enhancing research-based educational planning and developing community-oriented evaluation indicators that can assess the number of revised educational programs based on societal needs. Therefore, understanding the critical elements in revising medical education programs, which play the most significant role in addressing societal needs and responding to changing disease patterns and new health priorities, is both a necessity and an important priority.
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.