Table 4.
Perceived utility of topics in didactic trainings. Items were rated on a 5-point scale (1 = very unimportant; 5 = very important)
| Item | Mean ± Standard Deviation | Effect size (Cohen’s d) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Junior physicians | Assistant professors | ||
| Overview of medical education in Germany | 3.00 ± 1.29a | 3.24 ± 1.24 | −0.19 |
| Specific characteristics of the home institution | 3.74 ± 1.22 | 3.83 ± 1.16 | |
| Teaching session planning | 3.78 ± 1.26 | 3.73 ± 1.20 | |
| Specific characteristics of teaching formats | 4.04 ± 1.18 | 3.92 ± 1.19 | |
| Meeting the needs of a diverse student population | 3.82 ± 1.39 | 3.71 ± 1.30 | |
| Educational psychology | 3.80 ± 1.47 | 3.89 ± 1.42 | |
| Medical education research | 3.39 ± 1.46 | 3.52 ± 1.48 | |
| Presentation skills | 3.96 ± 0.67 | 4.05 ± 1.51 | |
| Designing practical examinations | 3.88 ± 1.28 | 3.76 ± 1.38 | |
| Designing oral examinations | 3.97 ± 1.32 | 3.97 ± 1.28 | |
| Designing written examinations | 3.83 ± 1.30 | 3.83 ± 1.30 | |
a p < 0.05 for comparisons between junior physicians and assistant professors (independent t test). Effect size (Cohen’s d) reported when t test was significant