Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41144692›Full record

Observational studyUnited European gastroenterology journal2025

Harmonising Gastroenterology Training: An Analysis of Gastroenterology Training Curricula of the United European Gastroenterology Member Societies.

Sophie Schlosser-Hupf, Jonas Staudacher, Verena Wagner, Mira Unger, Paula Sousa, Inga Marie Donning, Martina Müller-Schilling, Henriette Heinrich, GENIUS Study Group (National Societies Forum, National Societies Committee, Young Talent Group & Friends, Education Committee)

Abstract readObservational StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in United European gastroenterology journal, 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. Observational
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

9 authors.

Sophie Schlosser-HupfDepartment of Internal Medicine I, Gastroenterology, Endocrinology, Rheumatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Jonas StaudacherBerlin Institute of Health at Charité University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5697-2798
Verena WagnerUEG, Vienna, Austria.
Mira UngerUEG, Vienna, Austria.
Paula SousaDept. of Gastroenterology, Hospital São Teotónio - Unidade Local de Saúde Viseu Dão-Lafões, Viseu, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9009-9635
Inga Marie DonningDepartment of Internal Medicine I, Gastroenterology, Endocrinology, Rheumatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Martina Müller-SchillingDepartment of Internal Medicine I, Gastroenterology, Endocrinology, Rheumatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Henriette HeinrichDepartment for Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Universitätsspital Basel, Clarunis Universitäres Bauchzentrum, Basel, Switzerland.
GENIUS Study Group (National Societies Forum, National Societies Committee, Young Talent Group & Friends, Education Committee)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGastroenterology is a dynamic speciality that manages a wide range of gastrointestinal disorders. With the rising burden of gastrointestinal diseases, high-quality and standardised training is essential. United European Gastroenterology (UEG) aims to harmonise gastroenterology training across Europe.

methodsThis multicentre observational study analysed national gastroenterology training curricula from 51 UEG national member societies. Between February and December 2024, curricula were obtained via national societies and online resources. Analysis focussed on five domains: (1) clinical core knowledge, (2) technical and procedural skills, (3) research, (4) non-technical competencies and (5) mentoring and assessment structures.

resultsMedian training duration was 60 months (IQR 48-72). Only 7.1% of curricula allowed part-time training; fewer than 17% permitted early sub-specialisation. Clinical core knowledge: All curricula defined core clinical competencies, including hepatology, upper gastrointestinal disorders, pancreatic and IBD care. Technical and procedural skills: Basic endoscopy was universally required, with a median of 300 gastroscopies and 200 colonoscopies. Advanced procedures featured in 70.0% of curricula, with substantial variation. RESEARCH: Research training appeared in 76.2% of curricula, though structure and depth varied. Non-technical competencies: Non-technical competencies were covered in only 11.9%; communication (64.3%), leadership (26.2%), and professionalism (23.8%) were most common. Areas like shared decision-making, interprofessional collaboration, AI, and sustainability were rarely included. Training, mentoring and assessment frameworks: Training centre and trainer requirements were specified in 26.2% and 23.8% of curricula, respectively. One-third included formal mentoring. Competency-based objectives were present in 78.6% and logbooks in 42.9%. Few used structured tools: EPAs (7.1%), DOPS (9.5%) and Mini-CEX (2.4%). Exams were common; 9.5% used the ESEGH. The UEG Blue Book was cited in 24%. DISCUSSION: Competency-based training is widespread, but structured assessments and non-technical skills are inconsistently addressed. There is a need for minimum training standards and greater curricular alignment across UEG member societies to ensure consistent and high-quality gastroenterology training in Europe.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceCurriculumEducation, Medical, GraduateGastroenterologyEuropeHumansSocieties, Medicalmedical trainingobjective assessmentpostgraduate medical educationtrain the trainers

Identifiers

PMID41144692
PMCPMC12704577

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.