No abstract

BackgroundObjective-structured teaching encounters (OSTEs) are used across many disciplines to assess teaching ability. The OSTE detailed in this paper assesses 191 fourth-year medical students’ (M4) ability to identify and address lapses in professionalism based on Association of American Medical Colleges’ professionalism competencies. The research questions addressed areHow frequently do M4s address professionalism lapses observed during an OSTE?What factors influence whether M4s provide feedback when they observe professionalism lapses in an OSTE?MethodsStandardized patients (SPs) and standardized learners (SLs) were recruited and trained to participate in a standardized encounter with specific cognitive, social, and behavioral errors, including professionalism lapses. M4s viewed this encounter and then offered feedback to the SL, while remotely observed by faculty. Post-encounter, the SL and faculty completed identical checklists to assess both teaching readiness and ability to address professionalism concerns.ResultsAn analysis of frequencies showed that six of the Association of American Medical Colleges’ nine professional competencies were addressed in the checklist and/or discussed in the focus group. Analysis of transcribed debriefing sessions confirmed that M4s did not consistently address professionalism lapses by their peers.ConclusionsIn focus groups, M4s indicated that, while they noticed professionalism issues, they were uncomfortable discussing them with the SLs. Findings of the current study suggest how medical educators might support learners’ ability to address lapses in professionalism as well as topics for future research.

Purpose Research methodologies represent assumptions about knowledge and ways of knowing. Diverse research methodologies and methodological standards for rigor are essential in shaping the collective set of knowledge in health professions education (HPE). Given this relationship between methodologies and knowledge, it is important to understand the breadth of research methodologies and their rigor in HPE research publications. However, there are limited studies examining these questions. This study synthesized current trends in methodologies and rigor in HPE papers to inform how evidence is gathered and collectively shapes knowledge in HPE. Method This descriptive quantitative study used stepwise stratified cluster random sampling to analyze 90 papers from 15 HPE journals published in 2018 and 2019. Using a research design codebook, the authors conducted group coding processes for fidelity, response process validity, and rater agreement; an index quantifying methodological rigor was developed and applied for each paper. Results Over half of research methodologies were quantitative (51%), followed by qualitative (28%), and mixed methods (20%). No quantitative and mixed methods papers reported an epistemological approach. All qualitative papers that reported an epistemological approach (48%) used social constructivism. Most papers included participants from North America (49%) and Europe (20%). The majority of papers did not specify participant sampling strategies (56%) or a rationale for sample size (80%). Among those reported, most studies (81%) collected data within 1 year. The average rigor score of the papers was 56% (SD = 17). Rigor scores varied by journal categories and research methodologies. Rigor scores differed between general HPE journals and discipline-specific journals. Qualitative papers had significantly higher rigor scores than quantitative and mixed methods papers. Conclusions This review of methodological breadth and rigor in HPE papers raises awareness in addressing methodological gaps and calls for future research on how the authors shape the nature of knowledge in HPE.

To date, many medical schools define medical educators by who they teach rather than the quality of their engagement with learners. In addition, evidence suggests that a traditional terminal degree may not satisfy the developmental needs of educators engaged in competency based medical education. Perhaps, medical educators require additional competencies. This personal view introduces five competencies that enliven the way in which medical educators engage in career paths, recruitment, performance assessment, compensation, and professional development.

No abstract