ArticlePalliative medicine reports2025
An Educational Initiative Describing Clinician Teachers' Experiences Following Serious Illness Communication Skills Faculty Development Training.
Article in Palliative medicine reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Serious illness communication skills (SICS) are essential competencies for clinicians to possess. Unfortunately, SICS teaching is not routinely taught and many clinician teachers (CTs) never received training on how to teach them. We funded two cohorts of CTs to learn an evidence-based approach to SICS teaching to scale a unified approach to such training. Objective: The primary aim of this study was to explore CT experiences and attitudes toward SICS teaching following completion of VitalTalk Faculty Development training. Our secondary aim was to identify perceived barriers and enablers experienced by CTs in the translation of newly acquired skills into the workplace. Design/Measurements: Survey and semi-structured interviews administered post-training. Setting: Large metropolitan academic hospital in Canada. Fifteen (83%) of CTs completed the survey and 6 (40%) were interviewed. Participants were 38 years old (avg), female (80%), physicians (87%), nurse practitioners (13%), and in practice 8 years (avg). Results: One-hundred percent of participants would recommend the course to colleagues, believing it increased their SICS teaching quality and comfort to teach this topic in varied settings. Post-training, 90% of cohort 1 and 0% of cohort 2 taught SICS in workshops. Seventy percent of cohort 1 and 60% of cohort 2 taught SICS at the bedside across 10 specialties and interdisciplinary groups. Top cited teaching enablers were funding, protected time, and administrative support. All participants reported being likely to teach a workshop within the year. Eighty percent reported training increased their comfort to lead such conversations and 67% reported more frequently engaging in them. Qualitative analysis revealed that successful implementation requires SICS teaching to be valued at every level of the institution. Conclusion: Investing in faculty development for a group of CTs led to increased confidence in teaching about and having serious illness conversations and informed needs for a local community-of-practice primed to rapidly scale SICS teaching.
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.