ArticleNeurology. Education2026
Education Research: Entrustable Professional Activities for General Neurology Advanced Practice Providers: Results of a Modified Delphi Consensus Process.
Article in Neurology. Education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Education Research: More Than a Checkbox: Implementing a Narrative-Based Child Neurology Resident Assessment System.Neurology. Education · 2026Article
- From Competence to Mastery: Reframing Neurology's Approach to Competency-Based Education.Neurology. Education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: A dedicated didactic framework, assessment strategy, and consensus expectations for advanced practice providers (APPs) entering general neurology practice for the first time have not been described. We aimed to define entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for general neurology APPs and to provide further validity evidence for the EPAs through application of the EQual rubric. Methods: This was a modified Delphi consensus process. Panelists were leaders of neurology APP fellowship programs and other established experts in neurology APP education. The steering committee identified putative EPA topics. Panelists voted on a 5-point Likert scale how important it was that a new general neurology APP be able to perform specific activities with indirect supervision remotely available by the end of their on-the-job training. Panelists were allowed to propose modifications to putative EPAs and suggest new EPAs. After 3 rounds of voting, full EPA descriptions were drafted by the steering committee. Full EPA descriptions were sent to external experts in neurology APP education for assessment of their structure and quality. The steering committee met again to discuss feedback from the external experts and make adjustments as needed. The full EPA descriptions were sent to the Delphi panelists for a final round of voting. Results: Of 35 experts invited to participate in the Delphi process, 30 agreed to serve as panelists, 16 of whom were program leaders in neurology APP fellowship programs. The steering committee proposed 13 core and 52 nested EPA topics and the panelists proposed 6 modifications and an additional 4 nested EPAs. After 3 rounds of voting, 13 core and 46 nested EPAs were retained and full EPA descriptions were authored. All EPA descriptions met the pre-specified cut score for quality and structure and were retained in a final Delphi round. Overall entrustment expectations did not differ between panelists who were fellowship program leaders and those who were not (5-point Likert median [interquartile range], 4 [4-5] vs 4 [4-5], Discussion: These consensus EPAs may be applied for curricular development and assessment for new general neurology APPs. Entrustment expectations did not differ between those who were leaders in fellowship programs and those who were not.
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.