A comparison of three different quality assurance systems for higher medical training

This source preferred by Stephen Allen

Authors: Turnbull, C., Baker, P. and Allen, S.C.

Journal: Clinical Medicine

Volume: 7

Pages: 486-491

ISSN: 1470-2118

Quality assurance (QA) of medical training is a growing concern. There have been few studies comparing different methods. A window of opportunity occurred when a Royal College of Physicians (RCP) visit was followed soon after by a pilot of a web-based questionnaire in a deanery which already had a well-developed QA system in geriatric medicine. The different methods of RCP visit, deanery visit and web-based survey were compared. Surveys are easily administered and repeated but may be hindered by poor response rates and lack of corroborating information. Negative aspects can be exaggerated and positive ones overlooked. Trainers' views tend to be underused. Visits consume more time and resources but give a better overview. Each method format was found to have advantages and disadvantages and no one method alone would have picked up all the information. This paper recommends a robust deanery mechanism as a continuous QA mechanism backed up by periodic focused external visits.

This data was imported from PubMed:

Authors: Turnbull, C., Baker, P. and Allen, S.

Journal: Clin Med (Lond)

Volume: 7

Issue: 5

Pages: 486-491

ISSN: 1470-2118

DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.7-5-486

Quality assurance (QA) of medical training is a growing concern. There have been few studies comparing different methods. A window of opportunity occurred when a Royal College of Physicians (RCP) visit was followed soon after by a pilot of a web-based questionnaire in a deanery which already had a well-developed QA system in geriatric medicine. The different methods of RCP visit, deanery visit and web-based survey were compared. Surveys are easily administered and repeated but may be hindered by poor response rates and lack of corroborating information. Negative aspects can be exaggerated and positive ones overlooked. Trainers' views tend to be underused. Visits consume more time and resources but give a better overview. Each method format was found to have advantages and disadvantages and no one method alone would have picked up all the information. This paper recommends a robust deanery mechanism as a continuous QA mechanism backed up by periodic focused external visits.

This data was imported from Scopus:

Authors: Turnbull, C., Baker, P. and Allen, S.

Journal: Clinical Medicine, Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London

Volume: 7

Issue: 5

Pages: 486-491

ISSN: 1470-2118

DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.7-5-486

Quality assurance (QA) of medical training is a growing concern. There have been few studies comparing different methods. A window of opportunity occurred when a Royal College of Physicians (RCP) visit was followed soon after by a pilot of a web-based questionnaire in a deanery which already had a well-developed QA system in geriatric medicine. The different methods of RCP visit, deanery visit and web-based survey were compared. Surveys are easily administered and repeated but may be hindered by poor response rates and lack of corroborating information. Negative aspects can be exaggerated and positive ones overlooked. Trainers' views tend to be underused. Visits consume more time and resources but give a better overview. Each method format was found to have advantages and disadvantages and no one method alone would have picked up all the information. This paper recommends a robust deanery mechanism as a continuous QA mechanism backed up by periodic focused external visits.

This data was imported from Web of Science (Lite):

Authors: Turnbull, C., Baker, P. and Allen, S.

Journal: CLINICAL MEDICINE

Volume: 7

Issue: 5

Pages: 486-491

ISSN: 1470-2118

DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.7-5-486

This data was imported from Europe PubMed Central:

Authors: Turnbull, C., Baker, P. and Allen, S.

Journal: Clinical medicine (London, England)

Volume: 7

Issue: 5

Pages: 486-491

eISSN: 1473-4893

ISSN: 1470-2118

Quality assurance (QA) of medical training is a growing concern. There have been few studies comparing different methods. A window of opportunity occurred when a Royal College of Physicians (RCP) visit was followed soon after by a pilot of a web-based questionnaire in a deanery which already had a well-developed QA system in geriatric medicine. The different methods of RCP visit, deanery visit and web-based survey were compared. Surveys are easily administered and repeated but may be hindered by poor response rates and lack of corroborating information. Negative aspects can be exaggerated and positive ones overlooked. Trainers' views tend to be underused. Visits consume more time and resources but give a better overview. Each method format was found to have advantages and disadvantages and no one method alone would have picked up all the information. This paper recommends a robust deanery mechanism as a continuous QA mechanism backed up by periodic focused external visits.

The data on this page was last updated at 05:16 on July 15, 2019.