Dataset Information

Evidence-Based Alignment of Pathology Residency With Practice: Methodology and General Consideration of Results.

ABSTRACT: Few medical specialties engage in ongoing, organized data collection to assess how graduate medical education in their disciplines align with practice. Pathology educators, the American Board of Pathology, and major pathology organizations undertook an evidence-based, empirical assessment of what all pathologists need to learn in categorical residency. Two challenges were known when we commenced and we encountered 2 others during the project; all were ultimately satisfactorily addressed. Initial challenges were (1) ensuring broad representation of the new-in-practice pathologist experience and (2) adjusting for the effect on this experience of subspecialty fellowship(s) occurring between residency and practice. Additional challenges were (3) needing to assess and quantify degree and extent of subspecialization in different practice settings and (4) measuring changing practice responsibilities with increasing time in practice. We instituted annual surveys of pathologists who are relatively new (<10 years) in practice and a survey of physician employers of new pathologists. The purpose of these surveys was to inform (1) the American Board of Pathology certification process, which needs to assess the most critical knowledge, judgment, and skills required by newly practicing pathologists, and (2) pathology graduate medical education training requirements, which need to be both efficient and effective in graduating competent practitioners. This article presents a survey methodology to evaluate alignment of graduate medical education training with the skills needed for new-in-practice physicians, illustrates an easily interpreted graphical format for assessing survey data, and provides high-level results showing consistency of findings between similar populations of respondents, and between new-in-practice physicians and physician-employers.

SUBMITTER: Black-Schaffer WS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6104218 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evidence-Based Alignment of Pathology Residency With Practice: Methodology and General Consideration of Results.

Black-Schaffer W Stephen WS Gross David J DJ Crawford James M JM Robboy Stanley J SJ Johnson Kristen K Cohen Michael B MB Austin Melissa M Sanfrancesco Joseph J Karcher Donald S DS Powell Suzanne Z SZ Johnson Rebecca L RL

Academic pathology 20180101

Few medical specialties engage in ongoing, organized data collection to assess how graduate medical education in their disciplines align with practice. Pathology educators, the American Board of Pathology, and major pathology organizations undertook an evidence-based, empirical assessment of what all pathologists need to learn in categorical residency. Two challenges were known when we commenced and we encountered 2 others during the project; all were ultimately satisfactorily addressed. Initial ...[more]

PMID: 30151423

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Evidence-based medicine (EBM) in general practice involves applying a complex combination of best-available evidence, the patient's preferences and the general practitioner's (GP) clinical expertise in decision-making. GPs and GP trainees learn how to apply EBM informally by observing each other's consultations, as well as through more deliberative forms of workplace-based learning. This study aims to gain insight into workplace-based EBM learning by investigating the extent to which GP supervisors and trainees recognise each other's EBM behaviour through observation, and by identifying aspects that influence their recognition. METHODS:We conducted a qualitative multicentre study based on video-stimulated recall interviews (VSI) of paired GP supervisors and GP trainees affiliated with GP training institutes in Belgium and the Netherlands. The GP pairs (n = 22) were shown fragments of their own and their partner's consultations and were asked to elucidate their own EBM considerations and the ones they recognised in their partner's actions. The interview recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed with NVivo. By comparing pairs who recognised each other's considerations well with those who did not, we developed a model describing the aspects that influence the observer's recognition of an actor's EBM behaviour. RESULTS:Overall, there was moderate similarity between an actor's EBM behaviour and the observer's recognition of it. Aspects that negatively influence recognition are often observer-related. Observers tend to be judgemental, give unsolicited comments on how they would act themselves and are more concerned with the trainee-supervisor relationship than objective observation. There was less recognition when actors used implicit reasoning, such as mindlines (internalised, collectively reinforced tacit guidelines). Pair-related aspects also played a role: previous discussion of a specific topic or EBM decision-making generally enhanced recognition. Consultation-specific aspects played only a marginal role. CONCLUSIONS:GP trainees and supervisors do not fully recognise EBM behaviour through observing each other's consultations. To improve recognition of EBM behaviour and thus benefit from informal observational learning, observers need to be aware of automatic judgements that they make. Creating explicit learning moments in which EBM decision-making is discussed, can improve shared knowledge and can also be useful to unveil tacit knowledge derived from mindlines.

Project description:ObjectiveIn the last 30 years, innovations in oral healthcare (OHC), such as advanced restorative techniques, shifts towards preventive and evidence-based care and changes in patients' expectations, have increased the complexity of clinical decision-making in OHC. Little is known about the perspectives of general dental practitioners (GDPs) on the value of providing preventive, patient-centred and evidence-based OHC. This study aimed to explore the range of perspectives present amongst GDPs on OHC.MethodQ-methodology was used to explore perspectives among 78 GDPs working in the Netherlands. Participants were asked to sort 50 statements representing three central domains in OHC: i.) restorative versus preventative OHC, ii.) disease-centred versus patient-centred OHC and iii.) expertise-based versus evidence-based OHC. Opinion statements about delivering OHC were formulated on the basis of published literature and input from OHC professionals. By-person factor analysis was used to reveal clusters of communality in statement rankings, which were interpreted and formed perspectives on OHC.ResultsFour perspectives, explaining 47% of variance, on OHC were identified amongst GDPs: 'the patient-focused dentist who values prevention', 'the outcome-oriented dentist who values learning from colleagues', 'the team player with ultimate care responsibility' and 'the dentist who considers oral health the responsibility of the patient.'ConclusionQ-methodology can be effectively used to describe the different perspectives that GDPs have on the challenges of preventive, patient-centred and evidence-based OHC. GDPs should not be seen as a homogenous group; rather they have different views and approaches to the care they provide. This has implications for health systems; awareness of the heterogeneity of practitioners' perspectives can potentially be used to develop bespoke quality of care improvement strategies that constructively engage with each of these different groups.

Dataset Information

Evidence-Based Alignment of Pathology Residency With Practice: Methodology and General Consideration of Results.

Publications

Evidence-Based Alignment of Pathology Residency With Practice: Methodology and General Consideration of Results.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets