The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Introducing competency-based postgraduate medical education in the Netherlands
Abstract
Medical boards around the world face the challenge of creating competency-based postgraduate training programs. Recent legislation requires that all postgraduate medical training programmes in The Netherlands be reformed. In this article the Dutch Advisory Board for Postgraduate Curriculum Development shares some of their experiences with guiding the design of specialist training programs, based on the Canadian Medical Educational Directives for Specialists (CanMEDS). All twenty-seven Dutch Medical Specialty Societies take three steps in designing a curriculum. First they divide the entire content of a specialty into logical units, so-called 'themes'. The second step is discussing, for each theme, for which tasks trainees have to be instructed, guided, and assessed. Finally, for each task an assessment method is chosen to focus on a limited number of CanMEDS roles. This leads to a three step training cycle: (i) based on their in-training assessment and practices, trainees will gather evidence on their development in a portfolio; (ii) this evidence stimulates the trainee and the supervisor to regularly reflect on a trainee's global development regarding the CanMEDS roles as well as on the performance in specific tasks; (iii) a personal development plan structures future learning goals and strategies. The experiences in the Netherlands are in line with international developments in postgraduate medical education and with the literature on workplace-based teaching and learning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905
Cited by
Teaching Quality Improvement and Patient Safety to Trainees: A Systematic Review
Wong, B. M., Etchells, E. E., Kuper, A., Levinson, W., & Shojania, K. G. (2010) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181e2d0c6 · Cited by 476
The assessment of professional competence: building blocks for theory development
van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Schuwirth, L. W. T., Scheele, F., Driessen, E. W., & Hodges, B. (2010) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2010.04.001 · Cited by 334
Self-citationWhen Do Supervising Physicians Decide to Entrust Residents With Unsupervised Tasks?
Sterkenburg, A., Barach, P., Kalkman, C., Gielen, M., & ten Cate, O. (2010) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181eab0ec · Cited by 276
Driessen, E., & Scheele, F. (2013) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2013.798403 · Cited by 110
Self-citationJippes, E., Van Luijk, S. J., Pols, J., Achterkamp, M. C., Brand, P. L. P., & Van Engelen, J. M. L. (2012) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2012.670325 · Cited by 58
Metadata
- Authors
- Scheele, F., Teunissen, P., Luijk, S. V., Heineman, E., Fluit, L., Mulder, H., Meininger, A., Wijnen-Meijer, M., Glas, G., Sluiter, H., & Hummel, T.
- Venue
- Medical Teacher
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 248-253
- ISSN
- 0142-159X (ISSN-L)
- 1466-187X
- OpenAlex
- W2037938207
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Introducing competency-based postgraduate medical education in the Netherlands. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01421590801993022
- The paper
- Scheele, F., Teunissen, P., Luijk, S. V., Heineman, E., Fluit, L., Mulder, H., Meininger, A., Wijnen-Meijer, M., Glas, G., Sluiter, H., & Hummel, T. (2008). Introducing competency-based postgraduate medical education in the Netherlands. Medical Teacher. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590801993022
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.