Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39234279›Full record

ArticleCanadian geriatrics journal : CGJ2024

Multi-Stakeholder Validation of an Entrustable Professional Activities Framework for Canadian Geriatrics Residency Programs.

Derek C P Fisk, Ben G Clendenning, Philip D St John, Jose Francois

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Derek C P FiskMax Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg.
Ben G ClendenningMax Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg.
Philip D St JohnMax Rady College of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Geriatric Medicine, Winnipeg.
Jose FrancoisUniversity of Manitoba Centre on Aging, Winnipeg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) have become a cornerstone for an increasing number of competency-based medical education programs. Today, frameworks of EPAs are being used in most, if not all, medical specialties. These frameworks can break a discipline down to its constituting tasks, and structure the training and evaluation of residents. In 2018, The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada created an EPA framework for Geriatric Specialty residency programs nationwide. The present study aims to evaluate this EPA framework through focus groups consisting of several stakeholder groups. Methods: Participants were recruited to be part of one of five focus groups-one for each stakeholder group of interest. The five focus groups consisted of: physician faculty, residents, allied health professionals, administrators/managers, and patients. Each focus group met once virtually over ZOOM Results: Multi-stakeholder consultation yielded feedback on many specific EPAs, suggestions for new EPAs, and additional input which gave rise to four themes: (i) EPA scope, (ii) Operationalization, (iii) Interprofessional Collaboration, and (iv) Patient Advocacy. Lastly, we received their thoughts on how the framework defines Geriatrics relative to the work of Care of the Elderly physicians in Canada. Conclusions: Consulting a variety of stakeholder groups generates a robust and diverse supply of feedback that holistically augments EPA frameworks to be more practical, appropriate, socially accountable and patient-centred.

Indexed as

care of the elderlycompetency-based medical educationfocus groupgeriatric medicinestakeholder

Identifiers

PMID39234279
PMCPMC11346625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.