This article draws upon original qualitative interview data with Norwegian male and female cyberengineer cadets at the Norwegian Cyber Defense Academy, who could in the future be working with AI-enabled systems in a variety of positions throughout the Norwegian military. The interviews explored how these cadets feel they as cyberengineers will be perceived in their future positions in the military, what challenges they feel they may face, and how gender may play a role in this. Different cyberengineers expressed concern about being able to communicate the cyber domain to their non-technology specialist colleagues due to the increasing complexity of new technologies. Gender appeared to be playing a role in this concern as the women interviewed expressed specific concerns that they feel as women, that they do not fit the stereotype of who is a cyberengineer, while some of the men felt that as cyberengineers they were seen as embodying a nerd masculinity, and that these gendered perceptions has implications for how they feel others perceive their competence levels. The findings from this article highlights gendered hierarchies in the military and the need for military institutions to focus on developing communication skills among those working with cyber operations. As the role of cyber is expected to grow in military operations, cyberengineers will need to find ways of communicating effectively with non-specialists—especially as complex AI-enabled systems are introduced. Finally, this paper argues the need for military institutions to take gender into account for this training and need for gender-sensitive policies.
ObjectivesInpatient falls are the most commonly reported safety incidents and are associated with serious injuries. This study aimed to use multifactorial interventions to reduce the delays to the diagnosis of serious injury in a time series analysis after serious incidents relating to falls within a central London Trust.MethodsA multiprofessional project team undertook process mapping to identify opportunities for improvement at different stages in the management of a fall. The interventions included an educational teaching session aimed at doctors, a lanyard card designed by doctors using the plan-do-study-act methodology, a falls-specific pager for radiographers, and a new system to refer to portering. Quantitative data were obtained using an serious incident database where serious injury occurred (SI data; n = 65) and routinely collected incident reporting database on falls regardless of injury (IR data; n = 178). Qualitative questionnaire data (n = 70) were also used to evaluate doctors’ confidence in falls assessment before and after interventions.ResultsResults in the IR data demonstrated a significant reduction in the median (interquartile range) minutes delay in the time to review a patient after a fall from 81 (43–180) to 51 (26–112; P = 0.003) and the time to order imaging from 102 (45–370) to 50 (33–96; P = 0.04). Analysis of the SI database demonstrated a nonstatistically significant reduction in the overall time taken to detect serious injury after a fall from 348 (126–756) to 192 (108–384) minutes (P = 0.070). Furthermore, analysis using statistical process control charts showed evidence of special cause variation and a shift in the process in detecting serious harm after a fall. Junior doctors’ confidence in investigations improved from 53% to 76% (P = 0.04) after the intervention.ConclusionsThe cumulative application of multiple interventions with small individual effects resulted in a substantial positive effect on delays and variability in diagnosis of serious harm. Given a similar institutional context, the more effective interventions in our study could be adopted elsewhere.
As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement, leaders in the field of interprofessional (IP) education have encouraged faculty to explore online adaptations to curriculum and examine strategies that enhance students’ structural competence. Structural competence is broadly defined as the ability to understand how oppression, governmental policies, and environmental inputs impact the health and well-being of an individual. With these changes in mind, a team of IP health science faculty developed two online curricular activities guided by the “common reading” book, Five Days at Memorial: Life and Death in a Storm-Ravaged Hospital by Sheri Fink. This article describes the development and findings of a mixed-methods evaluation of the two IP learning activities: (a) The Interprofessional Common Reading Experience (IPCRE) and (b) The IPCRE follow-up. The activities engaged over 250 students across multiple health professions (i.e., social work, nursing, athletic training, speech-language pathology, nutrition, and public health) attending three different universities. Our findings contribute to a greater understanding of how to develop online IP activities and curricular innovations that help to train equity-minded and anti-racist practitioners.
In order to increase the number of students entering the geriatric workforce, an understanding of factors influencing career preference and what may prevent students from pursuing geriatric careers is necessary. Using a convergent parallel mixed methods approach, the aim of this study was to provide insight for geriatric educators regarding the collective perceptions of aging and older persons held by 864 students from eight healthcare professions. Quantitative questions assessed students’ attitudes (Geriatric Attitudes Scale). Student responses to four open-ended questions were assessed using conventional content analysis. Results included rich narrative examples of healthcare professions students’ perceptions and understanding of the aging process, as well as myths and misconceptions of aging and older persons that can be used to inform geriatric curricula across multiple health professions training and education programs. Geriatric education is a critical avenue to correct misperceptions, quell ageism and address the current shortage in the geriatrician workforce.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.