ArticleBMC medical education2026
A survey on occupational medicine residency programs across european countries.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe European Union of Medical Specialists aims at improving post-graduate training in different disciplines developing European Training Requirements (ETRs) that reflect scientific progress. The study assessed the completeness, coherence, and applicability of the current Occupational Medicine (OM) ETR document and identified areas requiring revision and implementation.
methodsAn online survey was conducted among 22 European specialty training representatives to address specific items concerning the training of the OM specialists, including requirements for trainees, trainers and Institutions.
resultsAn OM specialty was present in all the countries investigated, with universities responsible for training in 56% cases. In every country theoretical knowledge and practical skills covered the following areas: framework for practice; clinical practice; hazard recognition, evaluation and control of risk; epidemiology and preventive health. Other topics, e.g., effective teaching and educational supervision; research methods; leadership, policy development and professionalism; business continuity, disaster preparedness and emergency management were not consistently covered, with gaps reported in 19-31.8% of countries. Suggested additions to the OM curriculum included disability, protection of conditions of susceptibility, future of work, ethics, interprofessional training, communication strategies, and emergency management.
conclusionsAlthough several common approaches to OM training emerged, among participating countries, some differences were identified in specific competency areas, governance processes, and assessment procedures. These findings suggest the need for further reshaping OM training according to the evolving features of the world of work.
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.