Project description:IntroductionInterviews are commonly used to select applicants for medical school, residency, and fellowship. However, interview techniques vary in acceptability, feasibility, reliability, and validity. This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of different interview methods in selecting the best qualified applicants for admission to medical school and developed a logic model to implement best practices for interviewing.MethodsFive electronic literature databases were searched for comparative studies related to interviewing in medical schools from inception through February 1, 2021. Inclusion criteria included publications in English that compared different methods of conducting a selection interview in medical schools with a controlled trial design. General study characteristics, measurement methodologies, and outcomes were reviewed. Quality appraisal was performed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) and the Oxford Risk of Bias Scale. Based on these findings, a logic model was constructed using content analysis.ResultsThirteen studies were included. The multiple mini-interview (MMI) was reliable, unbiased, and predicted clinical and academic performance; the virtual MMI increased reliability and lowered costs. For unstructured interviews, blinding interviewers to academic scores reduced bias towards higher scorers; student and faculty interviewers rated applicants similarly. Applicants preferred structured over unstructured interviews. Study quality was above average per the MERSQI, risk of bias was high per the Oxford scale, and between-study heterogeneity was substantial.DiscussionThere were few high-quality studies on interviewing applicants for admission to medical school; the MMI appears to offer a reliable method of interviewing. A logic model can provide a conceptual framework for conducting evidence-based admissions interviews.
Project description:BackgroundDespite the importance of pain management across specialties and the effect of poor management on patients, many physicians are uncomfortable managing pain. This may be related, in part, to deficits in graduate medical education (GME).ObjectiveWe sought to evaluate the methodological rigor of and summarize findings from literature on GME interventions targeting acute and chronic non-cancer pain management.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review by searching PubMed, MedEdPORTAL, and ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) to identify studies published before March 2019 that had a focus on non-cancer pain management, majority of GME learners, defined educational intervention, and reported outcome. Quality of design was assessed with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale-Education (NOS-E). One author summarized educational foci and methods.ResultsThe original search yielded 6149 studies; 26 met inclusion criteria. Mean MERSQI score was 11.6 (SD 2.29) of a maximum 18; mean NOS-E score was 2.60 (SD 1.22) out of 6. Most studies employed a single group, pretest-posttest design (n=16, 64%). Outcomes varied: 6 (24%) evaluated reactions (Kirkpatrick level 1), 12 (48%) evaluated learner knowledge (level 2), 5 (20%) evaluated behavior (level 3), and 2 (8%) evaluated patient outcomes (level 4). Interventions commonly focused on chronic pain (n=18, 69%) and employed traditional lectures (n=16, 62%) and case-based learning (n=14, 54%).ConclusionsPain management education research in GME largely evaluated chronic pain management interventions by assessing learner reactions or knowledge at single sites.
Project description:Background Despite the increased use of telemedicine, the evidence base on virtual supervision in graduate medical education (GME) is not well described. Objective To systematically review the impact of virtual supervision on trainee education, patient care, and patient satisfaction in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited specialties. Methods Two databases (PubMed, EMBASE) were searched from database inception to December 2022. Inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed, full-text, English-language articles reporting the use of virtual supervision in GME in ACGME-accredited specialties. Exclusion criteria were studies involving direct supervision, supervisors who were not credentialed physicians, or non-GME trainees. Two investigators independently extracted data and appraised the methodological quality of each study using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The reporting of this systematic review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Results Of 5278 records identified, 26 studies met the eligibility criteria. Virtual supervision was predominantly utilized in operating rooms and inpatient settings, facilitating clinical examinations or surgical procedures through videoconferencing software in specialties such as dermatology, neurosurgery, and orthopedics. However, some studies reported technical challenges that hindered effective teaching and communication. Based on self-reported surveys, supervisor and trainee satisfaction with virtual supervision was mixed, while patient satisfaction with the care was generally high. The MMAT ratings suggested limitations in sampling strategy, outcome measurement, and confounding factors. Conclusions Virtual supervision was applicable to various specialties and settings, facilitating communication between supervisors and trainees, although there were some technological challenges.
Project description:BackgroundLeadership is a critical component of physician competence, yet the best approaches for developing leadership skills for physicians in training remain undefined.ObjectiveWe systematically reviewed the literature on existing leadership curricula in graduate medical education (GME) to inform leadership program development.MethodsUsing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, ERIC, EMBASE, and MedEdPORTAL through October 2015 using search terms to capture GME leadership curricula. Abstracts were reviewed for relevance, and included studies were retrieved for full-text analysis. Article quality was assessed using the Best Evidence in Medical Education (BEME) index.ResultsA total of 3413 articles met the search criteria, and 52 were included in the analysis. Article quality was low, with 21% (11 of 52) having a BEME score of 4 or 5. Primary care specialties were the most represented (58%, 30 of 52). The majority of programs were open to all residents (81%, 42 of 52). Projects and use of mentors or coaches were components of 46% and 48% of curricula, respectively. Only 40% (21 of 52) were longitudinal throughout training. The most frequent pedagogic methods were lectures, small group activities, and cases. Common topics included teamwork, leadership models, and change management. Evaluation focused on learner satisfaction and self-assessed knowledge. Longitudinal programs were more likely to be successful.ConclusionsGME leadership curricula are heterogeneous and limited in effectiveness. Small group teaching, project-based learning, mentoring, and coaching were more frequently used in higher-quality studies.
Project description:BackgroundWith the increasing recognition that leadership skills can be acquired, there is a heightened focus on incorporating leadership training as a part of graduate medical education. However, there is considerable lack of agreement regarding how to facilitate acquisition of these skills to resident, chief resident, and fellow physicians.MethodsArticles were identified through a search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycNet, Cochrane Systemic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1948 to 2019. Additional sources were identified through contacting authors and scanning references. We included articles that described and evaluated leadership training programs in the United States and Canada. Methodological quality was assessed via the MERSQI (Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument).ResultsFifteen studies, which collectively included 639 residents, chief residents, and fellows, met the eligibility criteria. The format, content, and duration of these programs varied considerably. The majority focused on conflict management, interpersonal skills, and stress management. Twelve were prospective case series and three were retrospective. Seven used pre- and post-test surveys, while seven used course evaluations. Only three had follow-up evaluations after 6 months to 1 year. MERSQI scores ranged from 6 to 9.ConclusionsDespite interest in incorporating structured leadership training into graduate medical education curricula, there is a lack of methodologically rigorous studies evaluating its effectiveness. High-quality well-designed studies, focusing particularly on the validity of content, internal structure, and relationship to other variables, are required in order to determine if these programs have a lasting effect on the acquisition of leadership skills.
Project description:BackgroundFlipped classroom (FC) instruction has become increasingly common in graduate medical education (GME).ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to profile the use of FC in the GME setting and assess the current status of research quality.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature search of major health and social science databases from July 2017 to July 2018. Articles were screened to ensure they described use of the FC method in an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited residency program and included research outcomes. Resulting articles were analyzed, described, and evaluated for research quality using the Kirkpatrick framework and the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).ResultsTwenty-two articles were identified, all of which were recently published. Five were only indirectly related to FC methods. Most studies reported Kirkpatrick-level outcomes. Studies involving resident learner opinions were generally positive. Pre-posttest studies resulted in large positive improvements in knowledge or skills attainment. Control group study results ranged from large positive (1.56) to negative effects (-0.51). Average MERSQI scores of 12.1 (range, 8.5-15.5) were comparable to GME research norms.ConclusionsVarying methods for implementing and studying the FC in GME has led to variable results. While residents expressed a positive attitude toward FC learning, shortcomings were reported. Approximately half of the studies comparing the flipped to the traditional classroom reported better achievement under the FC design. As indicated by the MERSQI score, studies captured by this review, on average, were as rigorous as typical research on residency education.
Project description:ObjectivesTo synthesize recent virtual global health education activities for graduate medical trainees, document gaps in the literature, suggest future study, and inform best practice recommendations for global health educators.MethodsWe systematically reviewed articles published on virtual global health education activities from 2012-2021 by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ERIC, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. We performed bibliography review and search of conference and organization websites. We included articles about primarily virtual activities targeting for health professional trainees. We collected and qualitatively analyzed descriptive data about activity type, evaluation, audience, and drivers or barriers. Heterogeneity of included articles did not lend to formal quality evaluation.ResultsForty articles describing 69 virtual activities met inclusion criteria. 55% of countries hosting activities were high-income countries. Most activities targeted students (57%), with the majority (53%) targeting trainees in both low- to middle- and high-income settings. Common activity drivers were course content, organization, peer interactions, and online flexibility. Common challenges included student engagement, technology, the internet, time zones, and scheduling. Articles reported unanticipated benefits of activities, including wide reach; real-world impact; improved partnerships; and identification of global health practice gaps.ConclusionsThis is the first review to synthesize virtual global health education activities for graduate medical trainees. Our review identified important drivers and challenges to these activities, the need for future study on activity preferences, and considerations for learners and educators in low- to middle-income countries. These findings may guide global health educators in their planning and implementation of virtual activities.
Project description:BackgroundProfessionalism standards encourage physicians to participate in public advocacy on behalf of societal health and well-being. While the number of publications of advocacy curricula for GME-level trainees has increased, there has been no formal effort to catalog them.ObjectiveTo systematically review the existing literature on curricula for teaching advocacy to GME-level trainees and synthesize the results to provide a resource for programs interested in developing advocacy curricula.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify articles published in English that describe advocacy curricula for graduate medical education trainees in the USA and Canada current to September 2017. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts to identify articles meeting our inclusion and exclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. We abstracted information and themes on curriculum development, implementation, and sustainability. Learning objectives, educational content, teaching methods, and evaluations for each curriculum were also extracted.ResultsAfter reviewing 884 articles, we identified 38 articles meeting our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Curricula were offered across a variety of specialties, with 84% offered in primary care specialties. There was considerable heterogeneity in the educational content of included advocacy curriculum, ranging from community partnership to legislative advocacy. Common facilitators of curriculum implementation included the American Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements, institutional support, and preexisting faculty experience. Common barriers were competing curricular demands, time constraints, and turnover in volunteer faculty and community partners. Formal evaluation revealed that advocacy curricula were acceptable to trainees and improved knowledge, attitudes, and reported self-efficacy around advocacy.DiscussionOur systematic review of the medical education literature identified several advocacy curricula for graduate medical education trainees. These curricula provide templates for integrating advocacy education into GME-level training programs across specialties, but more work needs to be done to define standards and expectations around GME training for this professional activity.
Project description:BackgroundPhysician burnout is pervasive within graduate medical education (GME), yet programs designed to reduce it have not been systematically evaluated. Effective approaches to burnout, aimed at addressing the impact of prolonged stress, may differ from those needed to improve wellness.ObjectiveWe systematically reviewed the literature of existing educational programs aimed to reduce burnout in GME.MethodsFollowing the PRISMA guidelines, we identified peer-reviewed publications on GME burnout reduction programs through October 2019. Titles and abstracts were reviewed for relevance, and full-text studies were acquired for analysis. Article quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).ResultsA total of 3534 articles met the search criteria, and 24 studies were included in the final analysis. Article quality varied, with MERSQI assessment scores varying between 8.5 and 14. Evaluation was based on participant scores on burnout reduction scales. Eleven produced significant results pertaining to burnout, 10 of which yielded a decrease in burnout. Curricula to reduce burnout among GME trainees varies. Content taught most frequently included stress management (n = 8), burnout reduction (n = 7), resilience (n = 7), and general wellness (n = 7). The most frequent pedagogical methods were discussion groups (n = 14), didactic sessions (n = 13), and small groups (n = 11). Most programs occurred during residents' protected education time.ConclusionsThere is not a consistent pattern of successful or unsuccessful programs. Further randomized controlled trials within GME are necessary to draw conclusions on which components most effectively reduce burnout.
Project description:PurposeDespite the growing presence of social media in graduate medical education (GME), few studies have attempted to characterize their effect on residents and their training. The authors conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature to understand the effect of social media on resident (1) education, (2) recruitment, and (3) professionalism.MethodThe authors identified English-language peer-reviewed articles published through November 2015 using Medline, Embase, Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, and ERIC. They extracted and synthesized data from articles that met inclusion criteria. They assessed study quality for quantitative and qualitative studies through, respectively, the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument and the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies.ResultsTwenty-nine studies met inclusion criteria. Thirteen (44.8%) pertained to residency education. Twitter, podcasts, and blogs were frequently used to engage learners and enhance education. YouTube and wikis were more commonly used to teach technical skills and promote self-efficacy. Six studies (20.7%) pertained to the recruitment process; these suggest that GME programs are transitioning information to social media to attract applicants. Ten studies (34.5%) pertained to resident professionalism. Most were exploratory, highlighting patient and resident privacy, particularly with respect to Facebook. Four of these studies surveyed residents about their social network behavior with respect to their patients, while the rest explored how program directors use it to monitor residents' unprofessional online behavior.ConclusionsThe effect of social media platforms on residency education, recruitment, and professionalism is mixed, and the quality of existing studies is modest at best.