The Work Place Educational Climate in Gynecological Oncology Fellowships Across Europe: The Impact of Accreditation
BACKGROUNDA good educational climate/environment in the workplace is essential for developing high-quality medical (sub)specialists. These data are lacking for gynecological oncology training. OBJECTIVEThis study aims to evaluate the educational climate in gynecological oncology training throughout...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of gynecological cancer 2015-01, Vol.25 (1), p.180-190 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 190 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 180 |
| container_title | International journal of gynecological cancer |
| container_volume | 25 |
| creator | Piek, Jurgen Bossart, Michaela Boor, Klarke Halaska, Michael Haidopoulos, Dimitrios Zapardiel, Ignacio Grabowski, Jacek Kesic, Vesna Cibula, David Colombo, Nicoletta Verheijen, Rene Manchanda, Ranjit |
| description | BACKGROUNDA good educational climate/environment in the workplace is essential for developing high-quality medical (sub)specialists. These data are lacking for gynecological oncology training.
OBJECTIVEThis study aims to evaluate the educational climate in gynecological oncology training throughout Europe and the factors affecting it.
METHODSA Web-based anonymous survey sent to ENYGO (European Network of Young Gynecological Oncologists) members/trainees to assess gynecological oncology training. This included sociodemographic information, details regarding training posts, and a 50-item validated Dutch Residency Educational Climate Test (D-RECT) questionnaire with 11 subscales (1–5 Likert scale) to assess the educational climate. The χ test was used for evaluating categorical variables, and the Mann-Whitney U (nonparametric) test was used for continuous variables between 2 independent groups. Cronbach α assessed the questionnaire reliability. Multivariable linear regression assessed the effect of variables on D-RECT outcome subscales.
RESULTSOne hundred nineteen gynecological oncological fellows responded. The D-RECT questionnaire was extremely reliable for assessing the educational environment in gynecological oncology (subscales’ Cronbach α, 0.82–0.96). Overall, trainees do not seem to receive adequate/effective constructive feedback during training. The overall educational climate (supervision, coaching/assessment, feedback, teamwork, interconsultant relationships, formal education, role of the tutor, patient handover, and overall consultant’s attitude) was significantly better (P = 0.001) in centers providing accredited training in comparison with centers without such accreditation. Multivariable regression indicated the main factors independently associated with a better educational climate were presence of an accredited training post and total years of training.
CONCLUSIONSThis study emphasizes the need for better feedback mechanisms and the importance of accreditation of centers for training in gynecological oncology to ensure training within higher quality clinical learning climates. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000323 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1639497419</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2552839397</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4269-ed11cef9d251d86f61b376194ef64f5f1ec0094a34c3f0ef12ac753553ac70d63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkU1r3DAQhkVpadK0_6AUQS-5ONXow7Z6C8tmuxBIDyntTSjyqOtEa7mSzbL_vtpN-kEEYkbMMy-aeQl5D-wCmG4-rVeLC_b_EVy8IKeguKpAivZlyZlsq1bDjxPyJuf7wmjO9GtywlWhmlqfkny7Qfo9pgf6NViHdNnNzk59HGygi9Bv7YS0H-hqP6CLIf7sXSncDMd8T68whLjLm37M9NKlmDNdzimO-JkedNfb0bqJRl-KLmHXT0fpt-SVtyHju6d4Rr5dLW8XX6rrm9V6cXldOclrXWEH4NDrjivo2trXcCeaGrREX0uvPKArA0krpBOeoQduXaOEUqJE1tXijJw_6o4p_poxT2bbZ1e-bAeMczZQCy11I0EX9OMz9D7OqSwhm8OuWqGFbgolH6njqAm9GVNZUdobYOZgiimmmOemlLYPT-Lz3Ra7v01_XPinu4thwpQfwrzDZDZow7Q56mnVNBVnoBiUV1Uu1-I3zCGWlQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2552839397</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Work Place Educational Climate in Gynecological Oncology Fellowships Across Europe: The Impact of Accreditation</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Piek, Jurgen ; Bossart, Michaela ; Boor, Klarke ; Halaska, Michael ; Haidopoulos, Dimitrios ; Zapardiel, Ignacio ; Grabowski, Jacek ; Kesic, Vesna ; Cibula, David ; Colombo, Nicoletta ; Verheijen, Rene ; Manchanda, Ranjit</creator><creatorcontrib>Piek, Jurgen ; Bossart, Michaela ; Boor, Klarke ; Halaska, Michael ; Haidopoulos, Dimitrios ; Zapardiel, Ignacio ; Grabowski, Jacek ; Kesic, Vesna ; Cibula, David ; Colombo, Nicoletta ; Verheijen, Rene ; Manchanda, Ranjit</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUNDA good educational climate/environment in the workplace is essential for developing high-quality medical (sub)specialists. These data are lacking for gynecological oncology training.
OBJECTIVEThis study aims to evaluate the educational climate in gynecological oncology training throughout Europe and the factors affecting it.
METHODSA Web-based anonymous survey sent to ENYGO (European Network of Young Gynecological Oncologists) members/trainees to assess gynecological oncology training. This included sociodemographic information, details regarding training posts, and a 50-item validated Dutch Residency Educational Climate Test (D-RECT) questionnaire with 11 subscales (1–5 Likert scale) to assess the educational climate. The χ test was used for evaluating categorical variables, and the Mann-Whitney U (nonparametric) test was used for continuous variables between 2 independent groups. Cronbach α assessed the questionnaire reliability. Multivariable linear regression assessed the effect of variables on D-RECT outcome subscales.
RESULTSOne hundred nineteen gynecological oncological fellows responded. The D-RECT questionnaire was extremely reliable for assessing the educational environment in gynecological oncology (subscales’ Cronbach α, 0.82–0.96). Overall, trainees do not seem to receive adequate/effective constructive feedback during training. The overall educational climate (supervision, coaching/assessment, feedback, teamwork, interconsultant relationships, formal education, role of the tutor, patient handover, and overall consultant’s attitude) was significantly better (P = 0.001) in centers providing accredited training in comparison with centers without such accreditation. Multivariable regression indicated the main factors independently associated with a better educational climate were presence of an accredited training post and total years of training.
CONCLUSIONSThis study emphasizes the need for better feedback mechanisms and the importance of accreditation of centers for training in gynecological oncology to ensure training within higher quality clinical learning climates.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1048-891X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-1438</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000323</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25525769</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: by the International Gynecologic Cancer Society and the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology</publisher><subject>Accreditation ; Adult ; Climate ; Continuity of care ; Education, Medical, Continuing ; Europe ; Feedback ; Fellowships and Scholarships ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Gynecology ; Gynecology - education ; Humans ; Internship and Residency ; Male ; Medical Oncology - education ; Oncology ; Questionnaires ; Students, Medical - psychology ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Workplace</subject><ispartof>International journal of gynecological cancer, 2015-01, Vol.25 (1), p.180-190</ispartof><rights>2015 by the International Gynecologic Cancer Society and the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 by IGCS and ESGO2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4269-ed11cef9d251d86f61b376194ef64f5f1ec0094a34c3f0ef12ac753553ac70d63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4269-ed11cef9d251d86f61b376194ef64f5f1ec0094a34c3f0ef12ac753553ac70d63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25525769$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Piek, Jurgen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bossart, Michaela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boor, Klarke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halaska, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haidopoulos, Dimitrios</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zapardiel, Ignacio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grabowski, Jacek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kesic, Vesna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cibula, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Colombo, Nicoletta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verheijen, Rene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manchanda, Ranjit</creatorcontrib><title>The Work Place Educational Climate in Gynecological Oncology Fellowships Across Europe: The Impact of Accreditation</title><title>International journal of gynecological cancer</title><addtitle>Int J Gynecol Cancer</addtitle><description>BACKGROUNDA good educational climate/environment in the workplace is essential for developing high-quality medical (sub)specialists. These data are lacking for gynecological oncology training.
OBJECTIVEThis study aims to evaluate the educational climate in gynecological oncology training throughout Europe and the factors affecting it.
METHODSA Web-based anonymous survey sent to ENYGO (European Network of Young Gynecological Oncologists) members/trainees to assess gynecological oncology training. This included sociodemographic information, details regarding training posts, and a 50-item validated Dutch Residency Educational Climate Test (D-RECT) questionnaire with 11 subscales (1–5 Likert scale) to assess the educational climate. The χ test was used for evaluating categorical variables, and the Mann-Whitney U (nonparametric) test was used for continuous variables between 2 independent groups. Cronbach α assessed the questionnaire reliability. Multivariable linear regression assessed the effect of variables on D-RECT outcome subscales.
RESULTSOne hundred nineteen gynecological oncological fellows responded. The D-RECT questionnaire was extremely reliable for assessing the educational environment in gynecological oncology (subscales’ Cronbach α, 0.82–0.96). Overall, trainees do not seem to receive adequate/effective constructive feedback during training. The overall educational climate (supervision, coaching/assessment, feedback, teamwork, interconsultant relationships, formal education, role of the tutor, patient handover, and overall consultant’s attitude) was significantly better (P = 0.001) in centers providing accredited training in comparison with centers without such accreditation. Multivariable regression indicated the main factors independently associated with a better educational climate were presence of an accredited training post and total years of training.
CONCLUSIONSThis study emphasizes the need for better feedback mechanisms and the importance of accreditation of centers for training in gynecological oncology to ensure training within higher quality clinical learning climates.</description><subject>Accreditation</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Climate</subject><subject>Continuity of care</subject><subject>Education, Medical, Continuing</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Fellowships and Scholarships</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Gynecology - education</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internship and Residency</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical Oncology - education</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Students, Medical - psychology</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Workplace</subject><issn>1048-891X</issn><issn>1525-1438</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkU1r3DAQhkVpadK0_6AUQS-5ONXow7Z6C8tmuxBIDyntTSjyqOtEa7mSzbL_vtpN-kEEYkbMMy-aeQl5D-wCmG4-rVeLC_b_EVy8IKeguKpAivZlyZlsq1bDjxPyJuf7wmjO9GtywlWhmlqfkny7Qfo9pgf6NViHdNnNzk59HGygi9Bv7YS0H-hqP6CLIf7sXSncDMd8T68whLjLm37M9NKlmDNdzimO-JkedNfb0bqJRl-KLmHXT0fpt-SVtyHju6d4Rr5dLW8XX6rrm9V6cXldOclrXWEH4NDrjivo2trXcCeaGrREX0uvPKArA0krpBOeoQduXaOEUqJE1tXijJw_6o4p_poxT2bbZ1e-bAeMczZQCy11I0EX9OMz9D7OqSwhm8OuWqGFbgolH6njqAm9GVNZUdobYOZgiimmmOemlLYPT-Lz3Ra7v01_XPinu4thwpQfwrzDZDZow7Q56mnVNBVnoBiUV1Uu1-I3zCGWlQ</recordid><startdate>201501</startdate><enddate>201501</enddate><creator>Piek, Jurgen</creator><creator>Bossart, Michaela</creator><creator>Boor, Klarke</creator><creator>Halaska, Michael</creator><creator>Haidopoulos, Dimitrios</creator><creator>Zapardiel, Ignacio</creator><creator>Grabowski, Jacek</creator><creator>Kesic, Vesna</creator><creator>Cibula, David</creator><creator>Colombo, Nicoletta</creator><creator>Verheijen, Rene</creator><creator>Manchanda, Ranjit</creator><general>by the International Gynecologic Cancer Society and the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201501</creationdate><title>The Work Place Educational Climate in Gynecological Oncology Fellowships Across Europe: The Impact of Accreditation</title><author>Piek, Jurgen ; Bossart, Michaela ; Boor, Klarke ; Halaska, Michael ; Haidopoulos, Dimitrios ; Zapardiel, Ignacio ; Grabowski, Jacek ; Kesic, Vesna ; Cibula, David ; Colombo, Nicoletta ; Verheijen, Rene ; Manchanda, Ranjit</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4269-ed11cef9d251d86f61b376194ef64f5f1ec0094a34c3f0ef12ac753553ac70d63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Accreditation</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Climate</topic><topic>Continuity of care</topic><topic>Education, Medical, Continuing</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Fellowships and Scholarships</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Gynecology - education</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internship and Residency</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical Oncology - education</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Students, Medical - psychology</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Workplace</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Piek, Jurgen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bossart, Michaela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boor, Klarke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halaska, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haidopoulos, Dimitrios</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zapardiel, Ignacio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grabowski, Jacek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kesic, Vesna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cibula, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Colombo, Nicoletta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verheijen, Rene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manchanda, Ranjit</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of gynecological cancer</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Piek, Jurgen</au><au>Bossart, Michaela</au><au>Boor, Klarke</au><au>Halaska, Michael</au><au>Haidopoulos, Dimitrios</au><au>Zapardiel, Ignacio</au><au>Grabowski, Jacek</au><au>Kesic, Vesna</au><au>Cibula, David</au><au>Colombo, Nicoletta</au><au>Verheijen, Rene</au><au>Manchanda, Ranjit</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Work Place Educational Climate in Gynecological Oncology Fellowships Across Europe: The Impact of Accreditation</atitle><jtitle>International journal of gynecological cancer</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Gynecol Cancer</addtitle><date>2015-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>180</spage><epage>190</epage><pages>180-190</pages><issn>1048-891X</issn><eissn>1525-1438</eissn><abstract>BACKGROUNDA good educational climate/environment in the workplace is essential for developing high-quality medical (sub)specialists. These data are lacking for gynecological oncology training.
OBJECTIVEThis study aims to evaluate the educational climate in gynecological oncology training throughout Europe and the factors affecting it.
METHODSA Web-based anonymous survey sent to ENYGO (European Network of Young Gynecological Oncologists) members/trainees to assess gynecological oncology training. This included sociodemographic information, details regarding training posts, and a 50-item validated Dutch Residency Educational Climate Test (D-RECT) questionnaire with 11 subscales (1–5 Likert scale) to assess the educational climate. The χ test was used for evaluating categorical variables, and the Mann-Whitney U (nonparametric) test was used for continuous variables between 2 independent groups. Cronbach α assessed the questionnaire reliability. Multivariable linear regression assessed the effect of variables on D-RECT outcome subscales.
RESULTSOne hundred nineteen gynecological oncological fellows responded. The D-RECT questionnaire was extremely reliable for assessing the educational environment in gynecological oncology (subscales’ Cronbach α, 0.82–0.96). Overall, trainees do not seem to receive adequate/effective constructive feedback during training. The overall educational climate (supervision, coaching/assessment, feedback, teamwork, interconsultant relationships, formal education, role of the tutor, patient handover, and overall consultant’s attitude) was significantly better (P = 0.001) in centers providing accredited training in comparison with centers without such accreditation. Multivariable regression indicated the main factors independently associated with a better educational climate were presence of an accredited training post and total years of training.
CONCLUSIONSThis study emphasizes the need for better feedback mechanisms and the importance of accreditation of centers for training in gynecological oncology to ensure training within higher quality clinical learning climates.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>by the International Gynecologic Cancer Society and the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology</pub><pmid>25525769</pmid><doi>10.1097/IGC.0000000000000323</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1048-891X |
| ispartof | International journal of gynecological cancer, 2015-01, Vol.25 (1), p.180-190 |
| issn | 1048-891X 1525-1438 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1639497419 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
| subjects | Accreditation Adult Climate Continuity of care Education, Medical, Continuing Europe Feedback Fellowships and Scholarships Female Follow-Up Studies Gynecology Gynecology - education Humans Internship and Residency Male Medical Oncology - education Oncology Questionnaires Students, Medical - psychology Surveys and Questionnaires Workplace |
| title | The Work Place Educational Climate in Gynecological Oncology Fellowships Across Europe: The Impact of Accreditation |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T02%3A29%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Work%20Place%20Educational%20Climate%20in%20Gynecological%20Oncology%20Fellowships%20Across%20Europe:%20The%20Impact%20of%20Accreditation&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20gynecological%20cancer&rft.au=Piek,%20Jurgen&rft.date=2015-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=180&rft.epage=190&rft.pages=180-190&rft.issn=1048-891X&rft.eissn=1525-1438&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/IGC.0000000000000323&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2552839397%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2552839397&rft_id=info:pmid/25525769&rfr_iscdi=true |