ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2025
Evaluation of the "Resident as teacher" curriculum: a needs assessment in medical education at a large academic institution.
Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the "Resident as teacher" curriculum: a needs assessment in medical education at a large academic institution.MedEdPublish (2016) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Strong skills in teaching for residents contribute to increased satisfaction and improved student interest. Few opportunities in medical education are offered at the junior resident level. We aim to evaluate the needs of residents in teaching at Université de Montréal (UdeM). Methods: A 19-question survey created after a literature review was sent to all 769 current PGY1 to PGY3 residents at UdeM to assess their interest and needs in various aspects of clinical teaching. Descriptive statistics were analyzed through themes to make recommendations for improvements in medical education training. Results: We received 65 completed surveys (8.5% response rate), mostly in family and internal medicine. Eighty percent of participants were interested in further training in teaching and 58% were interested in a medical education elective. Main skills to be improved are indirect supervision and adapting feedback to different learners. Lack of time was considered by most responders (89%) as the main factor limiting participation in further training. Narrative comments noted the lack of information on medical education resources and lack of recognition by faculty compared to clinical performance or research, particularly in family medicine. Conclusion: Protected time for varied medical education activities is needed, including better offers for an elective rotation. Information on currently available resources should be more widely circulated. Promoting and recognizing teaching and reserving time for direct supervision by faculty of teaching by junior residents should be encouraged.
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.