ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2026
Can hepatology lead the way? Synthesising current global curricula and proposing a model for an international specialty curriculum.
Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncreased understanding and treatments for liver disease have led in recent decades to the emergence of hepatology as a subspecialty within gastroenterology, and as a standalone medical specialty. Growing challenges in hepatology are a global problem, yet no global framework for education and training has been established. We therefore aim to conduct feasibility work to compare existing international curricula, examine the ability to merge existing frameworks and hypothesise a basis for a shared curriculum leading to a standardised global accreditation.
methodWe employed a cross-sectional content mapping approach to assess the hepatology training of eight regions across five continents. Regions were selected that had an English language curriculum to allow accurate comparison. Data were gathered for entry requirements, training pathway, research and procedural elements. These were structured using an established framework allowing for direct comparison to be drawn.
resultsEndoscopic competency for oesophago-gastroduodenoscopy (OGD) is the only procedural requirement shared between all regions that is necessary for completion of hepatology training. Trainees are assessed through a combination of clinical-based discussions / clinical examinations (CBD/CEX), direct observation of practice (DOP), logbooks, supervisor evaluations and oral examination using at least two of these methods.
conclusionWe found areas of considerable homogeneity between the eight curricula examined, which would be favourable and practical to develop a shared curriculum. Where differences exist, they may reflect the variation in local medical requirements. By adopting a competency-based assessment system, we believe there is the capacity to develop a global curriculum without compromising the quality of hepatology training. We propose a possible framework and areas of focus to establish the minimum standards to provide global uniformity in hepatology training and assessment while allowing for additional competencies to adapt the curriculum to local exigencies.
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.