Educational climate of a pathology residency program at a tertiary care hospital

Data was collected through a paper-format questionnaire stored in locked folders for data safety and security, and paper-format data was converted into electronic files using SPSS 21.0. The mean of the D-RECT ranking and each subscale were determined as follows: the descrip- tive data analysis included the calculation of Mean (M), Standard Deviation (SD), frequency (f), and percentages (%) and an average score below 3.6 was considered a negative perception in any subscale. Results The response rate was 100% (18). Refer to data in S1 Dataset for complete access to data that was used in the data analysis. Considering the age categories of more than and less than 30 years old, 83.3% (15) of the study participants were �30 years, and only 16.7% (3) were >30 years. The average age was 28.11±2.908 years, and PGRs included more females (94.4%) than males (5.6%). PGRs in the first two years of training were more significant in numbers (66.6%) than those PGRs in the last three years (33.4%). The histopathology department had the high- est number of PGRs, 55.5% (10), while 33.6% (6), 5.6% (1), and 5.6% (1) were working in the hematology, immunology, and chemical pathology department, respectively. Overall, positive experiences (M = >3.6) were reflected in EC of the pathology residency program as measured through the sub-scales on the D-RECT questionnaire, except Subscale: feedback (M�3.6) in Table 1. Comparison of means ANOVA. Data for the overall EC scores was typically distributed as the overall p>0.05.

Please refer to the Table in S1 Table for assessing the test of normality that was used to deter- mine the normality of data. An overall summary of the mean scores of EC across three differ- ent groups was calculated. There were fewer participants in the created Groups 4 and 5. Therefore, Groups 4 and 5 were added to Group 3 because only one participant was in Groups 4 and 5. There were equal participants in the final groups, i.e., Group 1 (less than 2), Group 2 (equal to 2), and Group 3 (greater than 2). A category “less than 2” refers to PGRs in the 1st year. The “Equal to 2” category refers to PGRs in the second year, and the “greater than 2” cate- gory refers to PGRs in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th years. A summary of means across different groups is as follows in Table 2. Table 1. Descriptive statistics for educational climate (D-RECT subscales). Subscales Perspective Mean±SD Agree Neutral Disagree Supervision 17 (94.4%) 1 (5.6%) 0 (0%) 4.56±0.457 Coaching and assessment 18 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4.45±0.429 Feedback 8 (44.4%) 10 (55.6%) 0 (0%) 3.19±0.458 Teamwork 18 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4.43±0.427 Peer collaboration 17 (94.4%) 1 (5.6%) 0 (0%) 4.54±0.606 Professional relations between attending 18 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4.41±0.465 Work is adapted to residents’ competence 18 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4.10±0.536 Attendings’ role 18 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4.58±0.506 Formal education 18 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4.19±0.504 Specialty Tutor’s role 18 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4.37±0.497 Patients sign out 18 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4.22±0.535

Overall D-RECT 18 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4.39±0.385 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303534.t001 PLOS ONE Educational climate of a pathology residency program PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303534 May 23, 2024 3 / 10