ArticleEJIFCC2024
From Practice to Proficiency: Evaluation of a Novel Workplace-Based Assessment (WBA) in a Postgraduate Chemical Pathology Residency Program in Pakistan.
Article in EJIFCC, 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.
- Article
- Developing Entrustable Professional Activities for Hematology Residency Program in a Low-Resource Setting: A Modified Delphi Study.Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: A workplace-based assessment (WBA) model was implemented in the postgraduate (PG) residency program of Chemical Pathology at the Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, Aga Khan University (AKU). PGs were assessed using direct observation of practical skills (DOPS), evaluation of clinical events (ECE) and case-based discussion (CBD) on a virtual learning environment (VLE) platform. Objectives: To evaluate WBA frequency, case mix, feedback, and satisfaction levels of faculty and PGs of Chemical Pathology at AKU. Methods: Data from January 2019 to June 2023 was assessed. Tool utilization and case mix frequencies were calculated. PG and faculty satisfaction levels, as well as feedback and discussion time, were averaged. A thematic analysis was conducted on descriptive comments. Results: Out of 911 WBAs attempted, 79.1% (n=730) were CBDs, 10.8% (n=98) were DOPS, and 9.1% (n=83) were ECEs, showing a well-distributed case mix. Average satisfaction levels for CBD, ECE, and DOPS among both PGs and faculty were 8.38, 8.48, and 8.59, and 8.20, 8.36, and 8.46, respectively. Faculty feedback averaged 8.40, 8.65, and 7.85 minutes for CBD, ECE, and DOPS, respectively. Discussion times averaged 9.37, 9.52, and 13.36 minutes for CBD, ECE, and DOPS, respectively. Suggestions for development were noted in 20.82% (n=225) of CBDs, 21.69% (n=18) of ECEs, and 16.32% (n=16) of DOPS. Positives were documented in 40% (n=292) of CBDs, 28.92% (n=24) of ECEs, and 7.14% (n=7) of DOPS. Conclusion: This study evaluated a web-based WBA model in chemical pathology training, suggesting its applicability in diverse pathology specialties and regional training programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39247664PMC11380148What 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.