ArticleBMC medical education2026
Strengthening health professions education during war: a multi-institutional case study of physical therapy programs in Ukraine.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecent assessments of Ukraine’s wartime health and rehabilitation systems highlight critical shortages in trained rehabilitation personnel. In response, Ukraine has undergone rapid expansion of rehabilitation services through health system reform. These changes created an urgent need to strengthen physical therapy education and align curricula with national and international competency standards. Despite urgent workforce needs, limited evidence exists describing structured, competency-based program reform models for health professions education in active conflict settings. This study provides a feasible framework for reflective educational reform in crisis-affected contexts.
methodsThis multiple-case design with cross-case synthesis describes implementation of the Academic Program Reflection Tool (APRT) across four Ukrainian universities offering physical therapy education. Program leadership teams engaged in a two-year reflective review process involving self-assessment, curriculum mapping, mentoring, and in-person workshops. Two members of each leadership team attended the in-person workshops. Data sources included institutional self-assessments, revised program documents, worksheets, and workshop transcripts. Findings were analyzed descriptively to identify themes related to curriculum development, assessment practices, faculty capacity, student progression, and resource constraints.
resultsInstitutions reported improved clarity in program philosophy, learning outcomes, and alignment with competency frameworks. Curriculum mapping revealed gaps in areas such as treatment for conflict-related injuries, global health, and continuing professional development. Participants identified limitations in assessment validity, reliance on lecture-based teaching, variability in clinical education practices, faculty shortages, and constrained institutional resources. The APRT process supported development of quality improvement plans and strengthened local leadership capacity for ongoing program reform.
conclusionsThis case study demonstrates the feasibility and educational value of structured program review in strengthening physical therapy education within a low-resource, conflict-affected setting. The APRT provided a framework for aligning curricula with competency-based education principles while supporting local ownership of reform. Findings may inform efforts in rehabilitation and health professions education in other low resource countries.
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.