2LK111 Part Reproduction Solna, Spring 2022

Respondents: 8
Answer Count: 6
Answer Frequency: 75.00%

In my view, I have developed valuable expertise/skills during the course.

In my view, I have developed valuable expertise/skills during the course.	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	1 (16.7%)
to a large extent	3 (50.0%)
to a very large extent	2 (33.3%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
In my view, I have developed valuable expertise/skills during the course.	4.2	0.8	18.1 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	4.5	5.0

In my view, I have achieved all the intended learning outcomes of the course.

In my view, I have achieved all the intended learning outcomes of the course.	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	1 (16.7%)
to some extent	1 (16.7%)
to a large extent	3 (50.0%)
to a very large extent	1 (16.7%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
In my view, I have achieved all the intended learning outcomes of the course.	3.7	1.0	28.2 %	2.0	3.5	4.0	4.0	5.0

In my view, there was a common theme running throughout the course – from learning outcomes to examinations.

In my view, there was a common theme running throughout the course – from learning outcomes to examinations.	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	2 (33.3%)
to a large extent	2 (33.3%)
to a very large extent	2 (33.3%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
In my view, there was a common theme running throughout the course – from learning outcomes to examinations.	4.0	0.9	22.4 %	3.0	3.5	4.0	4.5	5.0

In my view, the course has promoted a scientific way of thinking and reasoning (e.g. analytical and critical thinking, independent search for and evaluation of information).

In my view, the course has promoted a scientific way of thinking and reasoning (e.g. analytical and critical thinking, independent search for and evaluation of information).	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	3 (50.0%)
to a large extent	1 (16.7%)
to a very large extent	2 (33.3%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
In my view, the course has promoted a scientific way of thinking and reasoning (e.g. analytical and critical thinking, independent search for and evaluation of information).	3.8	1.0	25.6 %	3.0	3.0	3.5	4.5	5.0

In my view, during the course, the teachers have been open to ideas and opinions about the course’s structure and content.

In my view, during the course, the teachers have been open to ideas and opinions about the course’s structure and content.	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	0 (0.0%)
to a large extent	3 (50.0%)
to a very large extent	3 (50.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
In my view, during the course, the teachers have been open to ideas and opinions about the course’s structure and content.	4.5	0.5	12.2 %	4.0	4.0	4.5	5.0	5.0

My previous knowledge was sufficient to understand the teaching of the course.

My previous knowledge was sufficient to understand the teaching of the course.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	2 (33.3%)
To a large extent	3 (50.0%)
To a very large extent	1 (16.7%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
My previous knowledge was sufficient to understand the teaching of the course.	3.8	0.8	19.6 %	3.0	3.5	4.0	4.0	5.0

I have had a clear picture of what I was expected to learn during the course.

I have had a clear picture of what I was expected to learn during the course.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	2 (33.3%)
To a large extent	2 (33.3%)
To a very large extent	2 (33.3%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
I have had a clear picture of what I was expected to learn during the course.	4.0	0.9	22.4 %	3.0	3.5	4.0	4.5	5.0

The requirements of being responsible for organizing my own learning were reasonable.

The requirements of being responsible for organizing my own learning were reasonable.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	2 (33.3%)
To a large extent	4 (66.7%)
To a very large extent	0 (0.0%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
The requirements of being responsible for organizing my own learning were reasonable.	3.7	0.5	14.1 %	3.0	3.5	4.0	4.0	4.0

The requirements to search for information on my own were reasonable.

The requirements to search for information on my own were reasonable.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	2 (33.3%)
To a large extent	3 (50.0%)
To a very large extent	1 (16.7%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
The requirements to search for information on my own were reasonable.	3.8	0.8	19.6 %	3.0	3.5	4.0	4.0	5.0

I could easily find the information I needed/were looking for in Canvas.

I could easily find the information I needed/were looking for in Canvas.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	1 (16.7%)
To some extent	0 (0.0%)
To a large extent	3 (50.0%)
To a very large extent	2 (33.3%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
I could easily find the information I needed/were looking for in Canvas.	4.0	1.1	27.4 %	2.0	4.0	4.0	4.5	5.0

The requirements to work together with other students were reasonable.

The requirements to work together with other students were reasonable.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	1 (16.7%)
To a large extent	2 (33.3%)
To a very large extent	3 (50.0%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
The requirements to work together with other students were reasonable.	4.3	0.8	18.8 %	3.0	4.0	4.5	5.0	5.0

I received useful feedback on my performance during the course.

I received useful feedback on my performance during the course.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	1 (16.7%)
To a large extent	2 (33.3%)
To a very large extent	2 (33.3%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	1 (16.7%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
I received useful feedback on my performance during the course.	4.5	1.0	23.3 %	3.0	4.0	4.5	5.0	6.0

The work effort was reasonable in relation to the course's number of credits.

The work effort was reasonable in relation to the course's number of credits.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	2 (40.0%)
To a large extent	2 (40.0%)
To a very large extent	1 (20.0%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	5 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
The work effort was reasonable in relation to the course's number of credits.	3.8	0.8	22.0 %	3.0	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0

The examinations of the course were relevant to the learning outcomes.

The examinations of the course were relevant to the learning outcomes.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	2 (33.3%)
To a large extent	1 (16.7%)
To a very large extent	2 (33.3%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	1 (16.7%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
The examinations of the course were relevant to the learning outcomes.	4.3	1.2	27.9 %	3.0	3.5	4.5	5.0	6.0

Questions on Clinical Rotation (VFU)

The on-site training was relevant to the courses outcomes.

The on-site training was relevant to the courses outcomes.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	1 (16.7%)
To some extent	1 (16.7%)
To a large extent	4 (66.7%)
To a very large extent	0 (0.0%)
Don't know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
The on-site training was relevant to the courses outcomes.	3.5	0.8	23.9 %	2.0	3.5	4.0	4.0	4.0

I took part in relevant activities during my placements.

I took part in relevant activities during my placements.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	1 (16.7%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	1 (16.7%)
To a large extent	2 (33.3%)
To a very large extent	2 (33.3%)
Don't know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
I took part in relevant activities during my placements.	3.7	1.5	41.1 %	1.0	3.5	4.0	4.5	5.0

I was appointed a supervisor during my placement.

I was appointed a supervisor during my placement.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	1 (16.7%)
To a large extent	1 (16.7%)
To a very large extent	3 (50.0%)
Don't know/Not applicable	1 (16.7%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
I was appointed a supervisor during my placement.	4.4	0.9	20.3 %	3.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

My supervisors seemed informed about the purpose of the placement.

My supervisors seemed informed about the purpose of the placement.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	4 (66.7%)
To a large extent	1 (16.7%)
To a very large extent	1 (16.7%)
Don't know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
My supervisors seemed informed about the purpose of the placement.	3.5	0.8	23.9 %	3.0	3.0	3.0	3.5	5.0

How do you value the clinical rotation during Part Reproduction?

Student outpatient clinic (KUM) Huddinge Hospital

Student outpatient clinic (KUM) Huddinge Hospital	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	1 (50.0%)
very good	1 (50.0%)
Total	2 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Student outpatient clinic (KUM) Huddinge Hospital	4.5	0.7	15.7 %	4.0	4.5	4.5	4.5	5.0

Student outpatient clinic (KUM) Liljeholmen

Student outpatient clinic (KUM) Liljeholmen	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	5 (100.0%)
Total	5 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Student outpatient clinic (KUM) Liljeholmen	5.0	0.0	0.0 %	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Gyn Emergency Danderyd Hospital

Gyn Emergency Danderyd Hospital	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	4 (66.7%)
very good	2 (33.3%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Gyn Emergency Danderyd Hospital	4.3	0.5	11.9 %	4.0	4.0	4.0	4.5	5.0

GynStockholm

GynStockholm	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	2 (33.3%)
very good	4 (66.7%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
GynStockholm	4.7	0.5	11.1 %	4.0	4.5	5.0	5.0	5.0

Södertälje Hospital

Södertälje Hospital	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	1 (33.3%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	1 (33.3%)
very good	1 (33.3%)
Total	3 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Södertälje Hospital	3.7	1.5	41.7 %	2.0	3.0	4.0	4.5	5.0

Gynecologic oncology (Theme cancer)

Gynecologic oncology (Theme cancer)	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	1 (16.7%)
very good	5 (83.3%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Gynecologic oncology (Theme cancer)	4.8	0.4	8.4 %	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

ALB Endocrinology

ALB Endocrinology	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	2 (33.3%)
good	3 (50.0%)
very good	1 (16.7%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
ALB Endocrinology	3.8	0.8	19.6 %	3.0	3.5	4.0	4.0	5.0

ALB Hereditary cancer

ALB Hereditary cancer	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	1 (25.0%)
good	2 (50.0%)
very good	1 (25.0%)
Total	4 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
ALB Hereditary cancer	4.0	0.8	20.4 %	3.0	3.5	4.0	4.5	5.0

Abortion clinic Huddinge Hospital

Abortion clinic Huddinge Hospital	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	0 (0.0%)
Total	0 (0.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Abortion clinic Huddinge Hospital	0.0	0.0	NaN %	∞	0.0	0.0	0.0	-∞

Student outpatient clinic (KUM) at Karolinska University Hospital

Student outpatient clinic (KUM) at Karolinska University Hospital	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	3 (100.0%)
Total	3 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Student outpatient clinic (KUM) at Karolinska University Hospital	5.0	0.0	0.0 %	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Delivery ward with Midwife

Delivery ward with Midwife	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	1 (16.7%)
good	1 (16.7%)
very good	4 (66.7%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Delivery ward with Midwife	4.5	0.8	18.6 %	3.0	4.5	5.0	5.0	5.0

Delivery ward with Doctor

Delivery ward with Doctor	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	1 (16.7%)
neither bad nor good	1 (16.7%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	4 (66.7%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Delivery ward with Doctor	4.2	1.3	31.9 %	2.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Emergency obstetric care unit (AKUT-Spec)

Emergency obstetric care unit (AKUT-Spec)	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	1 (20.0%)
good	2 (40.0%)
very good	2 (40.0%)
Total	5 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Emergency obstetric care unit (AKUT-Spec)	4.2	0.8	19.9 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

Ultrasound

Ultrasound	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	3 (60.0%)
very good	2 (40.0%)
Total	5 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Ultrasound	4.4	0.5	12.4 %	4.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

Antenatal with Doctor

Antenatal with Doctor	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	1 (16.7%)
neither bad nor good	1 (16.7%)
good	2 (33.3%)
very good	2 (33.3%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Antenatal with Doctor	3.8	1.2	30.5 %	2.0	3.5	4.0	4.5	5.0

Maternity clinic Sundbyberg (MVC)

Maternity clinic Sundbyberg (MVC)	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	1 (25.0%)
very good	3 (75.0%)
Total	4 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Maternity clinic Sundbyberg (MVC)	4.8	0.5	10.5 %	4.0	4.5	5.0	5.0	5.0

The seminars were a support in my learning process during Part Reproduction?

The little fetus

The little fetus	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	1 (20.0%)
to a large extent	1 (20.0%)
to a very large extent	3 (60.0%)
Total	5 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
The little fetus	4.4	0.9	20.3 %	3.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Mixed cases

Mixed cases	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	0 (0.0%)
to a large extent	2 (40.0%)
to a very large extent	3 (60.0%)
Total	5 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Mixed cases	4.6	0.5	11.9 %	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Bleeding during pregnancy

Bleeding during pregnancy	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	1 (20.0%)
to a large extent	1 (20.0%)
to a very large extent	3 (60.0%)
Total	5 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Bleeding during pregnancy	4.4	0.9	20.3 %	3.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Bleeding disturbances

Bleeding disturbances	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	1 (20.0%)
to a large extent	1 (20.0%)
to a very large extent	3 (60.0%)
Total	5 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Bleeding disturbances	4.4	0.9	20.3 %	3.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Pelvis resistances

Pelvis resistances	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	1 (20.0%)
to a large extent	1 (20.0%)
to a very large extent	3 (60.0%)
Total	5 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Pelvis resistances	4.4	0.9	20.3 %	3.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Have you had the opportunity to perform a gynecological examination independently?

Have you had the opportunity to perform a gynecological examination independently?	Number of responses
No	0 (0.0%)
Yes, at one to three occasions	3 (50.0%)
Yes, at four to six occasions	1 (16.7%)
Yes, at seven to ten occasions	0 (0.0%)
Yes, at more than ten occasions	2 (33.3%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Have you had the opportunity to perform a gynecological examination independently?	3.2	1.5	46.5 %	2.0	2.0	2.5	4.0	5.0

Have you had the opportunity to participate in a childbirth?

Have you had the opportunity to participate in a childbirth?	Number of responses
No	2 (33.3%)
Yes, at one to three occasions	2 (33.3%)
Yes, at four to six occasions	1 (16.7%)
Yes, at seven to ten occasions	1 (16.7%)
Yes, at more than ten occasions	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Have you had the opportunity to participate in a childbirth?	2.2	1.2	54.0 %	1.0	1.5	2.0	2.5	4.0

What is your overall assessment of Part Reproduction?

What is your overall assessment of Part Reproduction?	Number of responses
very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	4 (66.7%)
very good	2 (33.3%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
What is your overall assessment of Part Reproduction?	4.3	0.5	11.9 %	4.0	4.0	4.0	4.5	5.0

Thank you for your feedback!