ArticleGMS journal for medical education2024
Qualitative expert evaluation of an educational intervention outline aimed at developing a shared understanding of cross-border healthcare.
Article in GMS journal for 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.
- Interprofessional education in medicine.GMS journal for medical education · 2024Article
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
Objectives: Although cross-border healthcare benefits many patients and healthcare professionals, it also poses challenges. To develop a shared understanding of these opportunities and challenges among healthcare professionals, we designed an educational intervention outline and invited experts in healthcare and education to evaluate it. The proposed intervention was based on theoretical principles of authentic, team, and reflective learning. Methods: Experts (N=11) received a paper outline of the intervention, which was subsequently discussed in individual, semi-structured interviews. Results: Based on a thematic analysis of the interviews, we identified 4 themes: 1) using the experience you have, 2) learning with the people you work with, 3) taking the time to reflect on the past and future, and 4) adapting the intervention to its context. Conclusion: According to the experts, the proposed intervention and its three underlying principles can enhance a shared understanding of cross-border healthcare. To unlock its full potential, however, they suggested adjusting the application of learning principles to its specific context. By situating learning in landscapes of practice, the intervention could contribute to the continuous development of cross-border healthcare.
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.