ArticleBMC medical education2024
Developing an entrustable professional activity for providing health education and consultation in occupational therapy and examining its validity.
Article 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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated Evaluation of Reflection and Feedback Quality in Workplace-Based Assessments by Using Natural Language Processing: Cross-Sectional Competency-Based Medical Education Study.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Factors associated with attainment of ad hoc entrustability among Taiwan otolaryngology resident physicians: a nationwide cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEntrustable Professional Activities (EPA)-based assessment is easily and intuitively used in evaluating the learning outcomes of competency-based medical education (CBME). This study aimed to develop an EPA for occupational therapy focused on providing health education and consultation (TP-EPA3) and examine its validity.
methodsNineteen occupational therapists who had completed online training on the EQual rubric evaluation participated in this study. An expert committee identified six core EPAs for pediatric occupational therapy. TP-EPA3 was developed following the EPA template and refined through consensus meetings. The EQual rubric, a 14-item, five-point criterion-based anchor system, encompassing discrete units of work (DU), entrustable, essential, and important tasks of the profession (EEIT), and curricular role (CR), was used to evaluate the quality of TP-EPA3. Overall scores below 4.07, or scores for DU, EEIT, and CR domains below 4.17. 4.00, and 4.00, respectively, indicate the need for modifications.
resultsThe TP-EPA3 demonstrated good validity, surpassing the required cut-off score with an average overall EQual score of 4.21 (SD = 0.41). Specific domain scores for DU, EEIT, and CR were 3.90 (SD = 0.69), 4.46 (SD = 0.44), and 4.42 (SD = 0.45), respectively. Subsequent revisions clarified observation contexts, enhancing specificity and focus. Further validation of the revised TP-EPA3 and a thorough examination of its reliability and validity are needed.
conclusionThe successful validation of TP-EPA3 suggests its potential as a valid assessment tool in occupational therapy education, offering a structured approach for developing competency in providing health education and consultation. This process model for EPA development and validation can guide occupational therapists in creating tailored EPAs for diverse specialties and settings.
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.