To effectively translate genetic advances into practice, engagement of primary care providers (PCPs) is essential. Using a qualitative, phenomenological methodology, we analyzed key informant interviews and focus groups designed to explore perspectives of urban and rural PCPs. PCPs endorsed a responsibility to integrate genetics into their practices and expected advances in genetic medicine to expand. However, PCPs reported limited knowledge and difficulties accessing resources, experts, and continuing education. Rural practitioners' additional concerns included cost, distance, and poor patient engagement. PCPs' perspectives are crucial to develop relevant educational and systems-based interventions to further expand genetic medicine in primary care.
Construct: Competence Based Medical Education (CBME) is designed to use workplace-based assessment (WBA) tools to provide observed assessment and feedback on resident competence. Moreover, WBAs are expected to provide evidence beyond that of more traditional mid- or end-of-rotation assessments [e.g., In Training Evaluation Records (ITERs)]. In this study we investigate competence in General Internal Medicine (GIM), by contrasting WBA and ITER assessment tools.Background: WBAs are hypothesized to improve and differentiate written and numerical feedback to support the development and documentation of competence. In this study we investigate residents’ and faculty members’ perceptions of WBA validity, usability, and reliability and the extent to which WBAs differentiate residents’ performance when compared to ITERs. Approach: We used a mixed methods approach over a three-year period, including perspectives gathered from focus groups, interviews, along with numerical and narrative comparisons between WBA and ITERs in one GIM program.Results: Residents indicated that the narrative component of feedback was more constructive and effective than numerical scores. They perceived the focus on specific workplace-based feedback was more effective than ITERs. However, quantitative analysis showed that overall rates of actionable feedback, including both ITERs and WBAs, were low (26%), with only 9% providing an improvement strategy. The provision of quality feedback was not statistically significantly different between tools; although WBAs provided more actionable feedback, ITERs provided more strategies. Statistical analyses showed that more than half of all assessments came from 11 core faculty.Conclusions: Participants in this study viewed narrative, actionable and specific feedback as essential, and an overall preference was found for written feedback over numerical assessments. However, quantitative analyses showed that specific actionable feedback was rarely documented, despite qualitative emphasis from both groups of its importance for developing competency. Neither formative WBAs or summative ITERs clearly provided better feedback, and both may still have a role in overall resident evaluation. Participant views differed in roles and responsibilities, with residents stating that faculty should be responsible for initiating assessments and vice-versa. These results reveal a disconnect between resident and faculty perceptions and practice around giving feedback and emphasize opportunities for programs adopting and implementing CBME to address how best to support residents and frontline clinical teachers.
BackgroundFormal and informal medical curricula convey expectations about professionalization, that is, the development of physician identity, and also about professionalism. This study examined whether, in general, junior residents experienced any dissonance between these roles and focused particularly on how they negotiated conflicts between compassion, self-care, duty and medical expertise.MethodsIn 2015, purposive sampling was used to select 21 first-year residents at a Canadian medical school. Participants listened to a 5-min audio-recording narrated in either male or female voice. Facing compassion fatigue after three obstetrical disasters over less than 2 days the resident narrator asks to go home. Participants reacted in writing to questions about this request and relevant teaching/modelling. Responses were analyzed using a qualitative, exploratory, thematic research design.ResultsFour themes were identified: i) empathy, self-doubt and fear of weakness, ii) the need for support from and communication with physicians and others, iii) education received, and iv) professionalization outranks professionalism. Participants agreed that under the circumstances the narrator’s care, compassion and request were appropriate. Never the less, many grappled with feeling that asking to be relieved of work demonstrated weakness and a shirking of responsibility. Respondents had received no formal teaching about balancing compassion for patients or self with professional duty. Preceptors’ informal teaching and modeling valorized scientific disengagement above all else. What emerged was participants’ drive to become detached clinicians who set aside emotional responses and interactions that could impede and be incompatible with professionalization. However, participants also recognized and lamented what was lost in such a transformation.ConclusionIn the transition from student to practitioner, trainees’ views and the modeling they receive shift emotion and compassion, whether for self or patients, from assets to liabilities as they aim to be invincible medical experts.
The use of quantitative intercoder reliability measures in the analysis of qualitative research data has often generated acrimonious debates among researchers who view quantitative and qualitative research methodologies as incompatible due to their unique ontological and epistemological traditions. While these measures are invaluable in many contexts, critics point out that the use of such measures in qualitative analysis represents an attempt to import standards derived for positivist research. Guided by extant research and our experience in qualitative research, we argue that it is possible to develop a qualitative-based measure of intercoder reliability that is compatible with the interpretivist epistemological paradigm of qualitative research. We present eight qualitative research process-based guidelines for evaluating and reporting intercoder reliability in qualitative research and anticipate that these recommendations will particularly guide beginning researchers in the coding and analysis processes of qualitative data analysis.
Career planning, decision making about specialty choice, and preparation for residency matching are significant sources of stress for medical students. Attempts have been made to structure and formalize career advising by including it in accreditation standards. There is an expressed need for national guidelines on career advising for medical students. The Future of Medical Education in Canada Postgraduate (FMEC PG) Implementation Project was created to ensure Canadian medical trainees receive the best education possible. From this, a diverse sub-working group (SWG), representing different Canadian regions, was formed to review career advising processes across the country. The SWG developed, through a modified formal consensus methodology, a strategy for medical student career advising that is adaptable to all schools in alignment with existing accreditation standards. The SWG outlined five guiding principles and five essential elements for Canadian universities offering an MD degree with recommendations on how to integrate the elements into each school’s career advising system. The five essential elements are a structured approach to career advising, information about available career options, elective guidance, preparation for residency applications, and social accountability. This Perspective endorses the view of the FMEC PG Implementation Project that national guidelines are important to ensure Canadian medical schools are consistently meeting accreditation standards by providing reliable and quality career advising to all medical students. The SWG’s position, based on national and provincial feedback, is that these guidelines will stimulate discourse and action regarding the requirements and processes to carry out these recommendations nationwide and share across borders.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.