Fig. 1
Model based on the social learning theory according to Bandura, supplemented by the steps of apperception (by using the RoMAT) for the trainee and amplification of the role model behaviour for the trainer
Fig. 2
Schematic representation of the assessment
Table 2
Characteristics of GP training practices
|
Intervention mandatory |
Intervention voluntary |
Controls | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of patients in practice (%) | |||
|
<2,000 |
17.9 |
32.0 |
9.4 |
|
2,000–2,500 |
29.3 |
44.0 |
34.5 |
|
>2,500 |
51.1 |
20.0 |
52.0 |
|
Location of practice (%) | |||
|
Village |
17.9 |
32.0 |
32.2 |
|
Small town |
9.2 |
4.0 |
12.3 |
|
City |
29.3 |
28.0 |
29.8 |
|
Big City |
42.4 |
28.0 |
22.8 |
|
Trainer/trainee couples (%) | |||
|
♂ + ♂ |
13.8 |
40.0 |
21.7 |
|
♀ + ♀ |
32.5 |
20.0 |
17.4 |
|
♀ + ♂/♂ + ♀ |
53.6 |
40.0 |
60.8 |
Table 3
Mean scores on the questionnaires of trainers and trainees; score differences between T1 and T3 on knowledge, attitude and role modelling for each group; effect sizes for the differences between intervention and control groups
|
Trainers |
Trainees | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Intervention mandatory |
Controls |
Intervention voluntary |
Intervention mandatory |
Controls |
Intervention voluntary | ||
|
Knowledge Mean (SD) |
T1 |
16.5 (3.8) |
15.9 (3.0) |
16.2 (3.7) |
15.1 (3.7) |
15.5 (3.5) |
14.9 (4.4) |
|
T2 |
18.2 (4.1) |
22.4 (3.6) | |||||
|
T3 |
18.0 (4.3) |
15.1 (3.6) |
19.0 (3.7) |
15.4 (3.9) |
16.9 (4.1) |
16.7 (2.6) | |
|
Mean Δa |
T3–T1 |
1.5 |
0.8 |
2.8 |
0.3 |
1.4 |
2.2 |
|
p Δa (Int-Cont) |
0.00* |
0.02* | |||||
|
ESb |
0.81 |
0.37 | |||||
|
Attitude Mean (SD) |
T1 |
3.3 (0.2) |
3.3 (0.2) |
3.3 (0.3) |
3.3 (0.3) |
3.3 (0.2) |
3.3 (0.2) |
|
T2 |
3.4 (0.2) |
3.3 (0.2) | |||||
|
T3 |
3.4 (0.3) |
3.3 (0.2) |
3.7 (0.8) |
3.3 (0.3) |
3.3 (0.3) |
3.5 (0.7) | |
|
Mean Δa |
T3–T1 |
0.1 |
0.0 |
0.4 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.2 |
|
p Δa (Int-Cont) |
0.15 |
0.43 | |||||
|
ESb |
0.50 |
0.00 | |||||
|
RoMAT Caring Attitude Mean (SD) |
T1 |
4.3 (0.6) |
4.3 (0.5) |
4.4 (0.5) | |||
|
T3 |
4.3 (0.5) |
4.3 (0.5) |
4.3 (0.6) | ||||
|
Mean Δa |
T3–T1 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
−0.1 | |||
|
p Δa (Int-Cont) |
0.87 | ||||||
|
ESb |
0.00 | ||||||
|
RoMAT Effectiveness Mean (SD) |
T1 |
4.1 (0.5) |
4.0 (0.6) |
4.2 (0.5) | |||
|
T3 |
4.1 (0.5) |
4.1 (0.5) |
4.0 (0.5) | ||||
|
Mean Δa |
T3–T1 |
0.0 |
0.1 |
−0.2 | |||
|
p Δa (Int-Cont) |
0.48 | ||||||
|
ESb |
0.00 | ||||||
Int intervention, Cont controls
aChange in score T3–T1
bEffect size = Meaniintervention − Meancontrol /SDcontrol (Hojat 2004) [40]
* Significant differences at p < 0.05
Table 4
Influence of the characteristics—personal, as a trainer and as a physician—of the GP trainers on the changes in their scores before and after the training, compared with Bonferroni’s procedure
|
Trainers (n = 80) |
Knowledge Δa |
Attitude Δa |
RoMAT Δa Caring Attitude |
RoMAT Δa Effectiveness | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
p mean |
95 % CI |
p mean |
95 % CI |
p mean |
95 % CI |
p mean |
95 % CI | |
|
Weight change |
0.03* |
Bf 1<>2 |
0.46 |
0.32 |
0.94 | |||
|
(1) <0 |
4.5 |
2.30–6.70 |
0.05 |
−0.07 to 0.16 |
0.23 |
−0.25 to 0.71 |
0.07 |
−0.21 to 0.36 |
|
(2) =0 |
1.3 |
−0.33 to 2.90 |
0.11 |
0.04–0.18 |
−0.01 |
−0.19 to 0.16 |
0.20 |
−0.15 to 0.19 |
|
(3) >0 |
1.5 |
−0.10 to 3.10 |
0.08 |
−0.06 to 0.13 |
−0.00 |
−0.13–0.13 |
0.02 |
−0.14 to 0.17 |
|
Years of experience as trainer |
0.14 |
0.04* |
0.25 |
0.05* | ||||
|
(1) <6 |
3.0 |
1.50–4.40 |
0.12 |
0.05–0.20 |
−0.03 |
−0.25 to 0.18 |
−0.07 |
−0.24 to 0.10 |
|
(2) ≥6 |
1.5 |
0.09–2.90 |
0.01 |
−0.06 to 0.08 |
0.10 |
−0.02 to 0.22 |
0.13 |
0.01–0.25 |
|
No. of GPs in practice |
0.68 |
0.95 |
0.02* |
Bf 1<>2 |
0.08 | |||
|
(1) 1 |
2.3 |
0.37–4.20 |
0.08 |
−0.02 to 0.18 |
0.37 |
0.02–0.71 |
0.17 |
−0.10 to 0.45 |
|
(2) 2 |
2.1 |
−0.00 to 4.10 |
0.06 |
−0.04 to 0.17 |
−0.16 |
−0.43 to 0.11 |
−0.18 |
−0.43 to 0.06 |
|
(3) ≥3 |
0.9 |
−0.95 to 2.60 |
0.05 |
−0.09 to 0.19 |
0.01 |
−0.10 to 0.25 |
0.08 |
−0.11 to 0.26 |
|
(4) Health centre |
2.2 |
−0.04 to 4.50 |
0.03 |
−0.07 to 0.13 |
0.06 |
−0.06 to 0.18 |
0.12 |
−0.07 to 0.31 |
|
No. of patients in practice |
0.81 |
0.30 |
0.04* |
Bf 2<>3 |
0.01* |
Bf 1<>3 | ||
|
(1) <2000 |
1.5 |
−1.10 to 4.00 |
−0.02 |
−0.14 to 0.10 |
0.14 |
−0.04 to 0.33 |
0.30 |
0.10–0.50 |
|
(2) 2,000–2,500 |
2.5 |
0.35–4.60 |
0.10 |
−0.00 to 0.20 |
0.22 |
−0.04 to 0.48 |
0.14 |
−0.07 to 0.35 |
|
(3) >2,500 |
2.1 |
0.77–3.50 |
0.06 |
−0.01 to 0.13 |
−0.10 |
−0.25 to 0.05 |
−0.10 |
−0.23 to 0.03 |
Bf Bonferroni
aChange in score T3–T1
* Significant differences at p < 0.05
Table 5
|
Strongly disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly agree | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 |
I believe it is necessary to educate obese patients on the health risks of obesity |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
2 |
Obesity is a chronic disease |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
3 |
I make accommodations for obese patients |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
4 |
Obesity is associated with serious medical conditions |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
5 |
Physicians should be role models by maintaining a normal weight |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
6 |
A 10 % reduction in body weight is sufficient to significantly improve obesity-related health complications |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
7 |
I would spend more time working on weight management issues if my time was reimbursed appropriately |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
8 |
I feel competent in prescribing weight loss programmes for obese patients |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
9 |
Most obese patients are well aware of the health risks of obesity |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
10 |
Medications to treat obesity should be limited to short-term (< 3 months) use |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
11 |
Most obese patients could reach a normal weight (for height) if they were motivated to do so |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
12 |
Most obese patients will not lose a significant amount of weight |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
13 |
I have negative reactions towards the appearance of obese patients |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
14 |
If a patient meets the appropriate criteria for obesity surgery, I would recommend an evaluation by a surgeon |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
15 |
Medications to treat obesity should be used chronically |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
16 |
I am usually successful in helping obese patients lose weight |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
17 |
For most obese patients, long-term maintenance of weight loss is impossible |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
18 |
It is acceptable to use ‘scare tactics’ to obtain compliance of the obese patient |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
19 |
I feel uncomfortable when examining an obese patient |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
20 |
It is difficult for me to feel empathy for an obese patient |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
Table 6
Role Model Apperception Tool (=RoMAT) [40]
|
S. no. |
My clinical trainer |
CA/EFa |
Strongly disagree |
Disagree |
Neutral |
Agree |
Strongly agree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 |
Has excellent clinical reasoning skills |
EF |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
2 |
Conveys empathy for patients |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
3 |
Communicates well with patients and relatives |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
4 |
Understands learners’ needs and is committed to the growths of learners |
EF |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
5 |
Establishes rapport with learners |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
6 |
Has a positive attitude towards learners |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
7 |
Demonstrates enthusiasm for one’s work |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
8 |
Is patient |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
9 |
Has a positive interaction with other health care workers |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
10 |
Makes learning exciting and stimulating |
EF |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
11 |
Has self-confidence |
EF |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
12 |
Is available for learners |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
13 |
Is honest and has integrity |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
14 |
Has leadership qualities |
EF |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
15 |
Is aware of his/her role model status |
EF |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
16 |
Is nice and easy to work with |
CA |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
17 |
Is professionally competent in difficult clinical situations and able to cope with adversity |
EF |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
aComponents of the RoMAT: Caring Attitude (CA) and effectiveness (EF)

