scholarly journals Standards for European Training Requirements in Interventional Neuroradiology

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Gerhard Schroth
Keyword(s):  
Interventional Neuroradiology ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
European Training

scholarly journals Standards for European training requirements in interventional neuroradiology

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marek Sasiadek ◽  
Naci Kocer ◽  
Istvan Szikora ◽  
Pedro Vilela ◽  
Mario Muto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interventional Neuroradiology ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
European Training

Abstract TP132: Selection and Activation of Sites in a Large Multi-Center Randomized Clinical Trial

Stroke ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bart M Demaerschalk ◽  
Robert D Brown ◽  
Virginia J Howard ◽  
MeeLee Tom ◽  
Mary E Longbottom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Site Selection ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Interventional Neuroradiology ◽  
Interquartile Range ◽  
Carotid Revascularization ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Medical Centers ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Times ◽  
And Training

Introduction: Careful selection and timely activation of clinical sites in multicenter clinical trials is critical for successful enrollment, subject safety, and generalizability of results. Methods: In the Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trial (CREST-2), a multidisciplinary Site Selection Committee evaluated applicants referred via participation in CREST, CREST principal investigators (PIs) and other investigators, StrokeNet and industry partners. Data for consideration included performance metrics in CREST and other carotid trials and a site selection questionnaire containing information on the investigators as well as quantitative data on carotid procedures performed. Any FDA warning letters were reviewed. Results: The Committee met bi-weekly for 36 months (n=64 meetings). Applications from 176 sites between March 2014 and July 2016 were evaluated: 153 were approved, 7 are under Committee review, 5 were approved but withdrew, 5 were placed on a waiting list, and 6 were rejected. One-hundred-four sites have completed the regulatory and training requirements to randomize: 51 (49%) academic medical centers, 31 (30%) private hospital-based centers, 16 (15%) private office-based practices, and 6 (6%) Veterans Administration medical centers. The mean times from application-to- approval was 5.2 weeks (interquartile range, 1.9, 6.2), and from approval-to-randomization status was 46.7 weeks (interquartile range, 35.4, 51.7). Specialties of the 104 site PIs are vascular surgery for 35 (33.7%), cardiology for 30 (28.8%), neurology for 25 (24%), neurosurgery for 8 (7.7%), interventional radiology for 4 (3.8%), and interventional neuroradiology for 2 (1.9%). Conclusions: Careful site selection is time-consuming for prospective sites and for trial leadership. Times from application-to-site-approval were modest (mean = 5.2 weeks), in contrast to the times for completing regulatory and training requirements (mean = 46.7 weeks). However, subject enrollment by teams from a wide range of medical centers led by a multi-disciplinary cohort of PIs will promote the generalizability of trial results.

European training requirements in phlebology

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean J. Guex ◽  
Fabrizio Mariani ◽  
Oscar Maleti ◽  
Claudine Hamel-Desnos ◽  
Spyros Vasdekis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Training Requirements ◽  
European Training

scholarly journals The 2021 European Training Requirements in Paediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanetee Busiah ◽  
Aleksandr Peet ◽  
Gianluca Tornese ◽  
Naomi Weintrob ◽  
John Schulga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Training Requirements ◽  
Paediatric Endocrinology ◽  
European Training

scholarly journals TYOT: Tripadvisor for psychiatry trainees?

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. 913-913
Author(s):  
L. De Picker
Keyword(s):  
Psychotherapy Training ◽  
Early Career ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Psychiatric Training ◽  
European Federation ◽  
Professional Literature ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Competing Interest ◽  
European Standards ◽  
European Training

BackgroundAlthough guidelines to ensure the quality of postgraduate psychiatric training in Europe are provided both by the statements of the European Federation of Psychiatric Trainees (EFPT) and the UEMS Psychiatry Section's European Training Requirements, actual training conditions in different European countries have been documented to vary widely. Furthermore, most trainees are unaware of the existence of such guidelines.ObjectiveThe test your own training (TYOT) project set out to create an easy-to-use online tool that allows trainees to assess how their own training compares in relation to the European standards, thereby empowering trainees all over Europe.MethodsAn EFPT Focus Group consisting of psychiatric trainees or early career psychiatrists from eleven European countries created a core survey of key aspects of psychiatry training, such as the duration of the training program, the availability of clinical and educational supervision, access to international professional literature, the use of a national logbook, based on the UEMS European Training Requirements and the EFPT statements. Additional subsets of questions were designed for specific domains such as theoretical training in psychiatry, psychotherapy training and the role of supervisors and training institutions. Next, the questions were transferred to a suitable online hosting platform, which allows to automatically provide feedback in an algorithmic fashion about how the trainee’s experience compares to the European standards.ResultsThe TYOT platform will be launched in January 2017 and the first results will be presented at the European Congress of Psychiatry 2017. For more information about the TYOT tool please visit http://efpt.eu/training/tyot/.Disclosure of interestThe author has not supplied his declaration of competing interest.

UEMS Section and Board of Paediatric Surgery—A Historical Perspective

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gian Battista Parigi ◽  
Udo Rolle ◽  
Salvatore Cascio ◽  
Jacob Williams ◽  
Piotr Czauderna
Keyword(s):  
Pediatric Surgery ◽  
Paediatric Surgery ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Surgical Service ◽  
Weak Correlation ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Medical Specialists ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
European Training

AbstractThe European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) Section and Board of Pediatric surgery was founded more than 40 years ago. Since then major activities have been related to the improvement of quality of care of pediatric surgery in Europe. Remarkable success was achieved in the development of pediatric surgery as an independent specialty all over Europe. Other major successful activities of the UEMS Section and Board of Pediatric Surgery consisted of the development of a high-quality European examination and delineating a minimal common standard in pediatric surgery training in the form of European training requirements. Recommendations drawn from examination experience support that candidates who achieve weaker passes in part 1 may wish to consider more practice before attempting part 2 due to the weak correlation between the two scores. It may be helpful for candidates to consider having some experience working in an English-speaking clinical setting, if not truly fluent in English, to improve their chances of being successful in the part 2 examination. Other achievements of the Section were accreditation of the training centers in Europe and European Census in pediatric surgery project. All the aforementioned activities led to standardization and harmonization of pediatric surgery, as well as contributed to increasing quality of pediatric surgical service throughout Europe.

A new European Training Charter in Interventional Neuroradiology - INR

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 952-954
Author(s):  
Olof Flodmark ◽  
Remy Demuth ◽  
Bernd Richling ◽  
Wolfgang Grisold ◽  
Laurent Pierot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interventional Neuroradiology ◽  
Training Charter ◽  
European Training

scholarly journals First steps towards international competency goals for residency training: a qualitative comparison of 3 regional standards in anesthesiology

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clément Buléon ◽  
Reuben Eng ◽  
Jenny W. Rudolph ◽  
Rebecca D. Minehart
Keyword(s):  
Residency Training ◽  
Clinical Work ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Qualitative Comparison ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Training Requirement ◽  
Regulatory Bodies ◽  
Competency Based ◽  
European Training ◽  
Training Expectations

Abstract Background Competency-based medical education (CBME) has revolutionized approaches to training by making expectations more concrete, visible, and relevant for trainees. Designing, applying, and updating CBME requirements challenges residency programs, which must address many aspects of training simultaneously. This challenge also exists for educational regulatory bodies in creating and adjusting national competencies to standardize training expectations. We propose that an international approach for mapping residency training requirements may provide a baseline for assessing commonalities and differences. This approach allows us to take our first steps towards creating international competency goals to enhance sharing of best practices in education and clinical work. Methods We chose anesthesiology residency training as our example discipline. Using two rounds of content analysis, we qualitatively compared published anesthesiology residency competencies for the European Union (The European Training Requirement), United States (ACGME Milestones), and Canada (CanMEDS Competence By Design), focusing on similarities and differences in representation (round one) and emphasis (round two) to generate hypotheses on practical solutions regarding international educational standards. Results We mapped the similarities and discrepancies between the three repositories. Round one revealed that 93% of competencies were common between the three repositories. Major differences between European Training Requirement, US Milestones, and Competence by Design competencies involved critical emergency medicine. Round two showed that over 30% of competencies were emphasized equally, with notable exceptions that European Training Requirement emphasized Anaesthesia Non-Technical Skills, Competence by Design highlighted more granular competencies within specific anesthesiology situations, and US Milestones emphasized professionalism and behavioral practices. Conclusions This qualitative comparison has identified commonalities and differences in anesthesiology training which may facilitate sharing broader perspectives on diverse high-quality educational, clinical, and research practices to enhance innovative approaches. Determining these overlaps in residency training can prompt international educational societies responsible for creating competencies to collaborate to design future training programs. This approach may be considered as a feasible method to build an international core of residency competency requirements for other disciplines.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document