Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40020741›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2025

Surveying the Efficacy of an Open Access Biomedical Informatics Boot Camp.

Skyler D Resendez, Gillian Franklin, Crystal Tomlin, Rachel Stephens, Heather Maness, Srikar Chamala, Ross Koppel, Peter L Elkin

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

8 authors.

Skyler D ResendezDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, United States.
Gillian FranklinDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, United States.
Crystal TomlinDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, United States.
Rachel StephensDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, United States.
Heather ManessCenter for Instructional Technology and Training, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States.
Srikar ChamalaDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, United States.
Ross KoppelDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, United States.
Peter L ElkinDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, United States.

Funding

University of Buffalo Clinical and Translational Science Institute - Supplement SchulyerUL1TR001412 · NCATS · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI MURPHY, TIMOTHY F · 2015 to 2024
$33.8M
National Library of Medicine Conference 2022T15LM012495 · NLM · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI PETER L. ELKIN · 2017 to 2026
$4.3M
Buffalo Research Innovation in Genomic and Healthcare Technology (BRIGHT) Short-Term Training and EducationR25LM014213 · NLM · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI PETER L. ELKIN, RAM SAMUDRALA · 2022 to 2026
$668k
Pain Medication Prescriptions and Misuse Following Treatment for Alcohol Use DisordersR21AA026954 · NIAAA · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI ELKIN, PETER L., LEONARD, KENNETH E · 2018 to 2019
$386k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001412NIAAA NIH HHS R21 AA026954NLM NIH HHS R25 LM014213NLM NIH HHS T15 LM012495
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the efficacy of a biomedical informatics boot camp with regard to improving the skill sets of its participants.The University at Buffalo hosts a free, virtual biomedical informatics boot camp annually. Lectures covering various subject matters are offered, for example, general programming, machine learning, natural language processing, and clinical decision support. Once the 2023 boot camp had concluded, an anonymous voluntary survey was distributed.Seventy percent of the survey respondents indicated that they agreed that their expectations were met. Eighty-two percent of the respondents indicated that our JupyterHub and the associated educational coding materials are useful tools for learning. Free response answers showed a desire for additional hands-on courses over theoretical lectures.The results were overwhelmingly positive. Most respondents felt they had expanded upon their knowledge of informatics. The study also pointed out challenges, including keeping difficulty levels appropriate for an audience with diverse educational backgrounds.

Indexed as

Access to InformationMedical InformaticsHumansSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID40020741
PMCPMC12196558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.