2LK111 Part Development Spring 2023 English (Utveckling VT23)

Respondents: 12
Answer Count: 12
Answer Frequency: 100.00%

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	1 (8.3%)
To some extent	2 (16.7%)
To a large extent	6 (50.0%)
To a very large extent	3 (25.0%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (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.	3.9	0.9	23.0 %	2.0	3.5	4.0	4.5	5.0

Comment
Not the course fault I’m in my 6th semester in France

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	1 (8.3%)
To some extent	4 (33.3%)
To a large extent	5 (41.7%)
To a very large extent	2 (16.7%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (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.	3.7	0.9	24.2 %	2.0	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0

Comment
It would be great that the seminars cover all the information that we need to learn (bc it doesnt cover everything) and as an exchange student we do not always find the swedish gidelines. we lose a lot of time making a good study support bc the seminars are not complete
Please make your requirements more clear. Fx we did not know the Mini CEX was mandatory before the last week.

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	1 (8.3%)
To some extent	3 (25.0%)
To a large extent	4 (33.3%)
To a very large extent	4 (33.3%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (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.	3.9	1.0	25.4 %	2.0	3.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

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	4 (33.3%)
To some extent	3 (25.0%)
To a large extent	3 (25.0%)
To a very large extent	2 (16.7%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (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.	3.2	1.1	35.0 %	2.0	2.0	3.0	4.0	5.0

Comment
Not all of the lectures/recordings pre to the seminars were available in english, so it was harder to get the information
sometimes we didnt have the online seminars in english
you should made a syllabus for the exchange sudents bc the information in the book : illustrated textbook of illustrated texbook is not always complete or follows the swedish guidelines

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	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	2 (16.7%)
To a large extent	5 (41.7%)
To a very large extent	5 (41.7%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (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.	4.2	0.8	17.7 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

Comment
the english and swedish version of things are not always the same, we do not always have all information in english...

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	0 (0.0%)
To a large extent	2 (18.2%)
To a very large extent	9 (81.8%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	11 (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.	4.8	0.4	8.4 %	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Comment
really enjoyed the teamwork

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	1 (8.3%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	2 (16.7%)
To a large extent	7 (58.3%)
To a very large extent	2 (16.7%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (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.	3.8	1.1	28.1 %	1.0	3.5	4.0	4.0	5.0

Comment
sometimes I wished for more critical feedback, it was almost too good and positive feedback. But I really liked that. It creates an environment, in which you are not as afraid of making mistakes.

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 (16.7%)
To a large extent	8 (66.7%)
To a very large extent	2 (16.7%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (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.	4.0	0.6	15.1 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	4.0	5.0

Comment
it was still a lot to be honest.

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 (16.7%)
To a large extent	8 (66.7%)
To a very large extent	0 (0.0%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	2 (16.7%)
Total	12 (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.	4.2	0.9	22.5 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	4.0	6.0

What is your overall assessment of Part Development?

What is your overall assessment of Part Development?	Number of responses
Very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	1 (8.3%)
good	9 (75.0%)
very good	2 (16.7%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
What is your overall assessment of Part Development?	4.1	0.5	12.6 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	4.0	5.0

Is there any lecture topic (during Part Development ) that has been particularly good or something that should be removed?

Is there any lecture topic (during Part Development ) that has been particularly good or something that should be removed?
The seminars could be improved, some lecturers didn’t cover the whole subject they were teaching
I loved the cardiology lecture
Cardiology lecture on site was so good
Clinical genetics

The quiz was relevant to the course learning objectives.

The quiz was relevant to the course learning objectives.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	1 (8.3%)
To some extent	4 (33.3%)
To a large extent	6 (50.0%)
To a very large extent	1 (8.3%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
The quiz was relevant to the course learning objectives.	3.6	0.8	22.1 %	2.0	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0

I believe that the majority of the doctors/clinical instructors have treated me with respect.

I believe that the majority of the doctors/clinical instructors have treated me with respect.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	1 (8.3%)
To a large extent	3 (25.0%)
To a very large extent	8 (66.7%)
Don’t know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
I believe that the majority of the doctors/clinical instructors have treated me with respect.	4.6	0.7	14.6 %	3.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

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

Pediatric physical examination

Pediatric physical examination	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	2 (16.7%)
to a large extent	5 (41.7%)
to a very large extent	5 (41.7%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Pediatric physical examination	4.2	0.8	17.7 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

Child Psychiatry, BUP seminars

Child Psychiatry, BUP seminars	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	2 (16.7%)
to some extent	1 (8.3%)
to a large extent	3 (25.0%)
to a very large extent	6 (50.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Child Psychiatry, BUP seminars	4.1	1.2	28.5 %	2.0	3.5	4.5	5.0	5.0

Neurology seminar

Neurology seminar	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	1 (8.3%)
to a large extent	5 (41.7%)
to a very large extent	6 (50.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Neurology seminar	4.4	0.7	15.1 %	3.0	4.0	4.5	5.0	5.0

Emergency & general pediatrics seminar

Emergency & general pediatrics seminar	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	6 (50.0%)
to a very large extent	6 (50.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Emergency & general pediatrics seminar	4.5	0.5	11.6 %	4.0	4.0	4.5	5.0	5.0

Infection seminar

Infection seminar	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	2 (18.2%)
to a large extent	4 (36.4%)
to a very large extent	5 (45.5%)
Total	11 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Infection seminar	4.3	0.8	18.4 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

Astma / Allergy seminar

Astma / Allergy seminar	Number of responses
to a very small extent	5 (41.7%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	3 (25.0%)
to a large extent	1 (8.3%)
to a very large extent	3 (25.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Astma / Allergy seminar	2.8	1.7	62.3 %	1.0	1.0	3.0	4.5	5.0

Neonatology seminar

Neonatology seminar	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	1 (9.1%)
to some extent	1 (9.1%)
to a large extent	4 (36.4%)
to a very large extent	5 (45.5%)
Total	11 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Neonatology seminar	4.2	1.0	23.5 %	2.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

Endocrine seminar

Endocrine seminar	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	3 (25.0%)
to some extent	1 (8.3%)
to a large extent	5 (41.7%)
to a very large extent	3 (25.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Endocrine seminar	3.7	1.2	31.5 %	2.0	2.5	4.0	4.5	5.0

Diabetes seminar

Diabetes seminar	Number of responses
to a very small extent	3 (27.3%)
to a small extent	1 (9.1%)
to some extent	3 (27.3%)
to a large extent	1 (9.1%)
to a very large extent	3 (27.3%)
Total	11 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Diabetes seminar	3.0	1.6	53.7 %	1.0	1.5	3.0	4.5	5.0

Gastroenterology seminar

Gastroenterology seminar	Number of responses
to a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
to a small extent	0 (0.0%)
to some extent	4 (33.3%)
to a large extent	5 (41.7%)
to a very large extent	3 (25.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Gastroenterology seminar	3.9	0.8	20.2 %	3.0	3.0	4.0	4.5	5.0

Questions on clinical rotation (VFU)

During clinical rotation (VFU) , I have practiced/discussed evidence-based work methods.

During clinical rotation (VFU) , I have practiced/discussed evidence-based work methods.	Number of responses
To a very small extent	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	1 (8.3%)
To some extent	3 (25.0%)
To a large extent	6 (50.0%)
To a very large extent	2 (16.7%)
Don't know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
During clinical rotation (VFU) , I have practiced/discussed evidence-based work methods.	3.8	0.9	23.1 %	2.0	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0

Comment
Really depended of the doctors speaking English with us

During clinical rotation (VFU) , the physical resources I needed were available (e.g. computer, conversation room, changing room, lunch room).

During clinical rotation (VFU) , the physical resources I needed were available (e.g. computer, conversation room, changing room, lunch room).	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	1 (8.3%)
To a very large extent	11 (91.7%)
Don't know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
During clinical rotation (VFU) , the physical resources I needed were available (e.g. computer, conversation room, changing room, lunch room).	4.9	0.3	5.9 %	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

During clinical rotation (VFU) , I have practiced safe work methods to avoid risks and accidents.

During clinical rotation (VFU) , I have practiced safe work methods to avoid risks and accidents.	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 (16.7%)
To a very large extent	10 (83.3%)
Don't know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
During clinical rotation (VFU) , I have practiced safe work methods to avoid risks and accidents.	4.8	0.4	8.1 %	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Comment
some times I would have worn a face mask at the ED, but I could not find one immediately. It was okay, but could be improved

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 (8.3%)
To some extent	2 (16.7%)
To a large extent	3 (25.0%)
To a very large extent	6 (50.0%)
Don't know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (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.	4.2	1.0	24.7 %	2.0	3.5	4.5	5.0	5.0

Comment
I didn’t learn a lot about management of patients on site because we stayed there only for a day each time
Place IPL earlier in the course

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	0 (0.0%)
To a small extent	0 (0.0%)
To some extent	0 (0.0%)
To a large extent	7 (58.3%)
To a very large extent	5 (41.7%)
Don't know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
I took part in relevant activities during my placements.	4.4	0.5	11.7 %	4.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

Comment
As an English-speaking student, it's always difficult to be very involved in the whole process, but in most cases, I can say that an effort has been made.

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	3 (25.0%)
To a large extent	2 (16.7%)
To a very large extent	6 (50.0%)
Don't know/Not applicable	1 (8.3%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
I was appointed a supervisor during my placement.	4.3	0.9	21.2 %	3.0	3.5	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	3 (25.0%)
To a large extent	3 (25.0%)
To a very large extent	6 (50.0%)
Don't know/Not applicable	0 (0.0%)
Total	12 (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.	4.2	0.9	20.4 %	3.0	3.5	4.5	5.0	5.0

What should be improved in the course? Please motivate.

What should be improved in the course? Please motivate.
it would help I think to have a correction to the cases of the seminars at the end of the class (written) in addition to the slides. Because in some seminars the information given didn’t fully cover the curriculum. Also, maybe check again the English videos and PowerPoint to make sure that it’s there and useable.
Maybe could be useful to have learning objectives or outcomes for the clinical placements. Sometimes it was difficult to know what was expected of the student role in each placement. Other than that the difficulties I have found are in relation to the language and that is something that we know was going to happen, and also see the effort in most rotations.
CRP instruction sould be improved by
As an international student, it is a bit challenging to have the relevant information from the book and not missing important things we must know as not always everything was in the book.
There must be equity between the resources available to international students vs Swedish students.
I know this is dependant on the day and the ward, but sometimes the doctors did not have time to do a lot of teaching and have to do a lot of bureaucratic work and students should be informed that they are allowed to bring laptops or study material during this time, so that they dont just need to sit around.

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

Have you had the opportunity to perform a pediatric examination independently?	Number of responses
No	0 (0.0%)
Yes, at one to three occasions	1 (8.3%)
Yes, at four to six occasions	5 (41.7%)
Yes, at seven to ten occasions	5 (41.7%)
Yes, at more than ten occasions	1 (8.3%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Have you had the opportunity to perform a pediatric examination independently?	3.5	0.8	22.8 %	2.0	3.0	3.5	4.0	5.0

How do you value the clinical rotation during Part Development?

Pediatric surgery

Pediatric surgery	Number of responses
very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	2 (16.7%)
good	6 (50.0%)
very good	4 (33.3%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Pediatric surgery	4.2	0.7	17.2 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

BB / Maternity ward Solna

BB / Maternity ward Solna	Number of responses
very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	1 (11.1%)
good	4 (44.4%)
very good	4 (44.4%)
Total	9 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
BB / Maternity ward Solna	4.3	0.7	16.3 %	3.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0

BB / Maternity ward Danderyd

BB / Maternity ward Danderyd	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	6 (100.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
BB / Maternity ward Danderyd	5.0	0.0	0.0 %	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

ER Student outpatient clinic (KUM)

ER Student outpatient clinic (KUM)	Number of responses
very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	2 (18.2%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	3 (27.3%)
very good	6 (54.5%)
Total	11 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
ER Student outpatient clinic (KUM)	4.2	1.2	27.9 %	2.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Infection

Infection	Number of responses
very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	4 (44.4%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	5 (55.6%)
Total	9 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Infection	4.1	1.1	25.6 %	3.0	3.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Endocrine

Endocrine	Number of responses
very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	1 (9.1%)
neither bad nor good	3 (27.3%)
good	4 (36.4%)
very good	3 (27.3%)
Total	11 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Endocrine	3.8	1.0	25.7 %	2.0	3.0	4.0	4.5	5.0

CPR

CPR	Number of responses
very bad	3 (25.0%)
bad	3 (25.0%)
neither bad nor good	2 (16.7%)
good	1 (8.3%)
very good	3 (25.0%)
Total	12 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
CPR	2.8	1.6	56.0 %	1.0	1.5	2.5	4.5	5.0

IPL

IPL	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	10 (100.0%)
Total	10 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
IPL	5.0	0.0	0.0 %	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

Neuro

Neuro	Number of responses
very bad	0 (0.0%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	0 (0.0%)
good	3 (37.5%)
very good	5 (62.5%)
Total	8 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Neuro	4.6	0.5	11.2 %	4.0	4.0	5.0	5.0	5.0

BUMM Sollentuna

BUMM Sollentuna	Number of responses
very bad	1 (11.1%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	4 (44.4%)
good	1 (11.1%)
very good	3 (33.3%)
Total	9 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
BUMM Sollentuna	3.6	1.3	37.5 %	1.0	3.0	3.0	5.0	5.0

BUMM Järva

BUMM Järva	Number of responses
very bad	1 (33.3%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	2 (66.7%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	0 (0.0%)
Total	3 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
BUMM Järva	2.3	1.2	49.5 %	1.0	2.0	3.0	3.0	3.0

BarnCentrum Solna BUMM

BarnCentrum Solna BUMM	Number of responses
very bad	1 (33.3%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	2 (66.7%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	0 (0.0%)
Total	3 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
BarnCentrum Solna BUMM	2.3	1.2	49.5 %	1.0	2.0	3.0	3.0	3.0

BarnCentrum Sollentuna (Rotebro) BUMM

BarnCentrum Sollentuna (Rotebro) BUMM	Number of responses
very bad	1 (33.3%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	2 (66.7%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	0 (0.0%)
Total	3 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
BarnCentrum Sollentuna (Rotebro) BUMM	2.3	1.2	49.5 %	1.0	2.0	3.0	3.0	3.0

Kista BUMM

Kista BUMM	Number of responses
very bad	1 (16.7%)
bad	2 (33.3%)
neither bad nor good	2 (33.3%)
good	1 (16.7%)
very good	0 (0.0%)
Total	6 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Kista BUMM	2.5	1.0	42.0 %	1.0	2.0	2.5	3.0	4.0

Täby BUMM

Täby BUMM	Number of responses
very bad	1 (33.3%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	2 (66.7%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	0 (0.0%)
Total	3 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Täby BUMM	2.3	1.2	49.5 %	1.0	2.0	3.0	3.0	3.0

Vallentuna BUMM

Vallentuna BUMM	Number of responses
very bad	1 (33.3%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	2 (66.7%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	0 (0.0%)
Total	3 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Vallentuna BUMM	2.3	1.2	49.5 %	1.0	2.0	3.0	3.0	3.0

Idun Barnklinik (BUMM)

Idun Barnklinik (BUMM)	Number of responses
very bad	1 (33.3%)
bad	0 (0.0%)
neither bad nor good	2 (66.7%)
good	0 (0.0%)
very good	0 (0.0%)
Total	3 (100.0%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Idun Barnklinik (BUMM)	2.3	1.2	49.5 %	1.0	2.0	3.0	3.0	3.0

Have you, during any clinical rotation (VFU) in the course, been trained on how to:

Have you, during any clinical rotation (VFU) in the course, been trained on how to:	Number of responses
· Prescribe medication	2 (66.7%)
· Prescribe intravenous infusion	1 (33.3%)
· Prescribe medication (in a prescription module in Take Care)	1 (33.3%)
· Provide oral medication orders to nurses	3 (100.0%)
Total	7 (233.3%)

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Coefficient of Variation	Min	Lower Quartile	Median	Upper Quartile	Max
Have you, during any clinical rotation (VFU) in the course, been trained on how to:	2.7	1.4	50.8 %	1.0	1.5	3.0	4.0	4.0

Please comment on what specifically you have trained to prescribe, and if you simulated in the Take Care exercise module.

Please comment on what specifically you have trained to prescribe, and if you simulated in the Take Care exercise module.
I haven’t been trained to do that
Yes, fluids analgesia
As TakeCare is only in Swedish we have not been trained on these matters.

Suggestions for best supervisor during Part Development (not clinical instructor or course director)?

Suggestions for best supervisor during Part Development (not clinical instructor or course director)?
Sara Fletcher-Sandersjöö
None
Tracy Ghattas
Sara Fletcher-Sanderjöö
Mozaffar Hessami at Kista Bumm. But Luise Landreh is the one and only!! We love her <3
Sara in ER
Dr. Luise Landgrehn

What were the strengths of the course? Please motivate.

What were the strengths of the course? Please motivate.
IPL, VFU-rotations, seminars with smaller groups
good organisation, good supervisors in general
- great support from the course administration and director qnd instructor - nice combination of VFU and Seminars - Booklet!!
Good seminars, good communication
Everything we needed was in canvas, so easy to reach. Doctors were super nice and interested in our learning. Also I appreciate how you always wanted our feedback.
The motivation and effort of teachers and supervisors. The setting of a powerful learning environment where we have an active and central role. The personal and close contact of the course administrator and clinical supervisors.
Clinical rotations we’re very well rounded, seeing many different aspects of the pediatric pacient
A lot of interlocutors to ask questions to, a very diverse course with lots of interesting subjects
interesting cases during seminars, i lke the teaching

Thank you for your feedback!