ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2025
Characteristics and Educational Support Resources Available to Emergency Medicine Core Faculty: A National Survey.
Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCore faculty are key to supporting the educational mission in emergency medicine (EM). Changes in the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements for minimum protected time for core faculty may no longer guarantee adequate support. We sought to assess EM core faculty characteristics, support, and the impact of the 2019 revisions to ACGME regulations. We explored the influence of individual and institutional characteristics on support and the impact of the regulatory changes.
methodsThis was a cross-sectional survey study of a convenience sample of EM core faculty. Participants completed an online survey of multiple-choice and completion items between April-June 2022. We calculated descriptive and comparative statistics to assess associations between individual (e.g., sociodemographics, rank) and institutional (e.g., region, program type) factors on resources and impact of ACGME revisions.
resultsA total of 596 individuals (57% male) from 116 residency programs participated, including 15 (3%) instructors/lecturers, 280 (47%) assistant professors, 182 (31%) associate professors, and 80 (13%) professors. Most (64%) were 36-50 years of age; 246 (41%) had completed a fellowship. Despite the change to the ACGME requirements in 2019, 417 (70%) reported no modification to their clinical work hours, and 420 (71%) reported no modification to their non-clinical responsibilities. There were statistically significant associations between number of residents per class (P < .001), duration of training program (P < .001), and type of institution (P < .001) with the number of administrative personnel. We also observed statistically significant associations between academic rank (P = .02), region (P =.01), number of residents per class (P = 0.02), and type of site (P = .01) with change to clinical work hours after changes to ACGME requirements.
conclusionA minority of participants reported a change to their clinical and non-clinical expectations after revisions to the ACGME regulations with disproportionate impact across faculty and program type.
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.