ArticleCureus2025
The Clinic Handbook: A Quality Improvement Project.
Article in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInternal Medicine Trainees (IMTs) are required to gain outpatient experience by scheduling clinics in each rotation. Due to a lack of knowledge of who to contact and varied scheduling procedures across different hospitals, trainees often encountered difficulties arranging these clinics.
aimTo improve the organisation and educational value of clinic weeks for IMTs through the development and implementation of a comprehensive, user-friendly Clinic Handbook.
methodsWe used a pre- and post-intervention study design and carried out quantitative and qualitative analyses of the responses. First, we distributed a baseline survey of IMTs to identify barriers to organising clinic weeks. Subsequently, we designed a Clinic Handbook by liaising with departmental secretaries and clinic administrative staff. The handbook was electronically distributed to IMTs. After 12 weeks, a follow-up survey was performed. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics by calculating and comparing mean Likert scores. Qualitative comments were reviewed thematically. This work was structured around a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) quality improvement framework.
resultsFifteen trainees completed the baseline survey, and sixteen completed the post-intervention survey. Mean Likert scores (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree) improved across key domains: ease of scheduling clinics (2.33 to 4.33), knowing who to contact in current specialty (3.06 to 4.58), knowing who to contact in other specialties (1.93 to 4.58), ability to plan clinics on time (2.60 to 4.33), and having no issues with other professionals/students already attending the clinics (2.73 to 3.83). All post-handbook survey respondents found the handbook useful and reported increased confidence in arranging clinics beyond their current speciality.
conclusionA low-cost, trainee-designed Clinic Handbook addressed system and information barriers to outpatient training and broadened access to speciality clinics. Embedding the handbook into induction and maintaining regular updates will sustain and scale these gains for trainees across the organisation and nationally.
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.