ArticleBMC medical education2026
Implementation of entrustable professional activities for interns within the new Australian National Framework: a pilot study using action-research to explore utility, and clarify challenges and enablers.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrograms worldwide are introducing programmatic assessment and Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) with strong theoretical foundations and growing research evidence regarding potential benefits. In Australia, the new National Framework for Prevocational Medical Training includes four EPAs for doctors in PGY1-2, who rotate through different specialties to gain broad experience: EPA1:Clinical assessment, EPA2:Recognition and Care of the Acutely Unwell Patient, EPA3:Prescribing, EPA4:Team communication. Little is known about how this new education model will work in practice. Hence a pilot study was conducted to (1) Investigate how feasibility, acceptability, educational value and overall utility of EPAs can be maximised, and (2) Clarify challenges and enablers of EPA implementation, operationalised via EPA assessments.
methodsThe study was conducted during intern terms 2-4, 2024 (10 weeks each) in a metropolitan health service. EPA assessments (EPAA) were implemented for interns working in eleven medical units across four specialties (medicine, surgery, mental health, emergency). Change strategies were designed using Kotter's 8-step and COM-B models. Action-research methodology was used and each 5-week cycle involved: enacting plans, gathering user data, analysing data, and co-designing improvements with expert and stakeholder panels. Quantitative and qualitative user data were collected from all EPAA e-forms, plus surveys and focus groups conducted each cycle.
resultsIn total, 738 EPAAs were submitted by 119 interns and 283 assessors. The frequency order was: EPA1(highest)-EPA4-EPA3-EPA2. The majority took 10 min or less to complete, and most were assessed by registrars, except in Emergency where consultants predominated. EPAA activity varied substantially across individual units, even within one specialty. User perspectives indicated that EPAAs' educational value depended primarily on the quality of the feedback discussion. Key challenges identified were establishing a trained assessor cohort, fitting EPAAs into workflow, refining the form design and rating scale (National Framework scale used in Phase 1 and modified Ottawa-scale in Phases 2-3). Multiple revisions to implementation were co-designed and executed across the pilot. Practical strategies to support implementation were clarified.
conclusionsThis large pilot provides valuable insights into EPA implementation according to the National Framework. Clarifying challenges and enablers may assist others. Optimising EPAA quantity, rating scale, form and feedback quality is important due to impacts on realising educational value and providing robust performance data for progress decisions.
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.