Dataset Information

Missed opportunities in the way medical schools evaluate the ethical domain in clerkship rotations.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Several lines of evidence indicate that medical schools have been failing to adequately nurture empathy and the ethical dimension in their graduates, the lack of which may play a central role in the genesis of medical errors, itself a major source of avoidable deaths, incapacity and wasted resources. It has been widely proposed that medical schools should adopt evaluation strategies as a means to promote a culture of respectful relationships. However, it is not clear if evaluation strategies in medical schools have addressed key domains related to that aim, such as ethics, through the perspective of their students. Hence, we conducted a national survey of instruments used by Brazilian medical schools to assess clerkship rotations from the perspective of students, with a main focus on the ethical domain.

Methods

The authors invited 121 randomly selected institutions to participate in the study. Key informants answered a questionnaire about clerkship rotations and sent copies of any instrument used to assess the quality of clerkship rotations according to the students' perspectives.

Results

Twenty-six (53%) of 49 participating schools used an instrument to assess the quality of clerkship rotations according to the perspective of students. Just 13 (27%) schools had instruments containing at least one question encompassing the ethical domain. Only 2 (4%) schools asked students specifically about the occurrence of any negative experience concerning the ethical domain during rotations. Merely 1 (2%) school asked students about having witnessed patient mistreatment and none asked about mistreatment against students themselves.

Conclusions

There are several missed opportunities in the way medical schools assess the quality of clerkship rotations regarding the ethical domain. Closing the gap between usual institutional discourses regarding ethics and how that dimension is assessed within clerkship rotations might represent an important step towards the improvement of medical education and healthcare systems.

SUBMITTER: Dos Santos MF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6541282 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Missed opportunities in the way medical schools evaluate the ethical domain in clerkship rotations.

Dos Santos Maria Fernanda MF Schoueri João F L JFL Vidal Camila T CT Hamamoto Filho Pedro T PT Fukushima Fernanda B FB Vidal Edison I O EIO

PloS one 20190529 5

<h4>Background</h4>Several lines of evidence indicate that medical schools have been failing to adequately nurture empathy and the ethical dimension in their graduates, the lack of which may play a central role in the genesis of medical errors, itself a major source of avoidable deaths, incapacity and wasted resources. It has been widely proposed that medical schools should adopt evaluation strategies as a means to promote a culture of respectful relationships. However, it is not clear if evalua ...[more]

PMID: 31141551

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNo published reports of studies have provided aggregate data on visiting medical student (VMS) programs at allopathic medical schools.MethodsDuring 2006, a paper survey was mailed to all 129 allopathic medical schools in the United States and Puerto Rico using a list obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Contents of the survey items were based on existing literature and expert opinion and addressed various topics related to VMS programs, including organizational aspects, program objectives, and practical issues. Responses to the survey items were yes-or-no, multiple-choice, fill-in-the-blank, and free-text responses. Data related to the survey responses were summarized using descriptive statistics.ResultsRepresentatives of 76 schools (59%) responded to the survey. Of these, 73 (96%) reported their schools had VMS programs. The most common reason for having a VMS program was "recruitment for residency programs" (90%). "Desire to do a residency at our institution" was ranked as the leading reason visiting medical students choose to do electives or clerkships. In descending order, the most popular rotations were in internal medicine, orthopedic surgery, emergency medicine, and pediatrics. All VMS programs allowed fourth-year medical students, and approximately half (58%) allowed international medical students. The most common eligibility requirements were documentation of immunizations (92%), previous clinical experience (85%), and successful completion of United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 (51%). Of the programs that required clinical experience, 82% required 33 weeks or more. Most institutions (96%) gave priority for electives and clerkships to their own students over visiting students, and a majority (78%) reported that visiting students were evaluated no differently than their own students. During academic year 2006-2007, the number of new resident physicians who were former visiting medical students ranged widely among the responding institutions (range, 0-76).ConclusionsMedical schools' leading reason for having VMS programs is recruitment into residency programs and the most commonly cited reason students participate in these programs is to secure residency positions. However, further research is needed regarding factors that determine the effectiveness of VMS programs in residency program recruitment and the development of more universal standards for VMS eligibility requirements and assessment.

Project description:BackgroundMentoring provides mentees and mentors with holistic support and research opportunities. Yet, the quality of this support has been called into question amidst suggestions that mentoring is prone to bullying and professional lapses. These concerns jeopardise mentoring's role in medical schools and demand closer scrutiny.MethodsTo better understand prevailing concerns, a novel approach to systematic scoping reviews (SSR) s is proposed to map prevailing ethical issues in mentoring in an accountable and reproducible manner. Ten members of the research team carried out systematic and independent searches of PubMed, Embase, ERIC, ScienceDirect, Scopus, OpenGrey and Mednar databases. The individual researchers employed 'negotiated consensual validation' to determine the final list of articles to be analysed. The reviewers worked in three independent teams. One team summarised the included articles. The other teams employed independent thematic and content analysis respectively. The findings of the three approaches were compared. The themes from non-evidence based and grey literature were also compared with themes from research driven data.ResultsFour thousand six titles were reviewed and 51 full text articles were included. Findings from thematic and content analyses were similar and reflected the tabulated summaries. The themes/categories identified were ethical concerns, predisposing factors and possible solutions at the mentor and mentee, mentoring relationship and/or host organisation level. Ethical concerns were found to stem from issues such as power differentials and lack of motivation whilst predisposing factors comprised of the mentor's lack of experience and personality conflicts. Possible solutions include better program oversight and the fostering of an effective mentoring environment.ConclusionsThis structured SSR found that ethical issues in mentoring occur as a result of inconducive mentoring environments. As such, further studies and systematic reviews of mentoring structures, cultures and remediation must follow so as to guide host organisations in their endeavour to improve mentoring in medical schools.

Project description:ContextIt is important for colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs) to provide opportunities for osteopathic medical students (OMSs) to conduct research under the guidance of professional researchers. However, COMs historically lag behind allopathic medical schools in research offerings for medical students. The literature would benefit from a synopsis of research opportunities for OMSs at COMs.ObjectivesThis study aims to assess the availability of research opportunities currently offered to OMSs and to identify structured research programs (SRPs) to provide data that may help COMs expand such opportunities.MethodsTwo online surveys were developed. The General Survey asked about general research opportunities, research requirements, and SRPs, which we define as optional, intramural, and mentored research programs. The follow-up SRP Survey sought to understand the history, funding, and organizational structure of SRPs. Between February and June 2021, the General and SRP Surveys were sent to all COMs in the United States. Response data were analyzed descriptively.ResultsResponses were received from 32 (84.2%) of 38 COMs. Nearly all COMs offered research symposia, offered third- or fourth-year research elective rotations, and provided some form of funding for OMSs to participate in research. Fourteen (43.8%) COMs had mandatory research requirements. Twenty COMs (62.5%) offered 31 SRPs, and surveys were completed for 25 (80.6%) SRPs. SRPs were founded a median (range) of 7 (1-43) years prior and accommodated 20 (4-50) OMSs annually. Among the responding SRPs, 12.0% had external funding, 96.0% required applications, 50.0% interviewed applicants prior to acceptance into the program, 72.0% required OMSs to identify their own mentors, 68.0% offered stipends to OMSs, 28.0% offered course credits, 96.0% had clinical research opportunities, and 68.0% offered research-oriented didactics. In 84.0% of SRPs, OMSs worked predominantly in the summer after OMS-I; for these SRPs, students had 4-10 weeks of dedicated time for participation in research.ConclusionsFindings from our surveys provide a synopsis of the research opportunities currently provided by COMs in the United States. Our data demonstrated wide variability of research opportunities among COMs.

Project description:BackgroundRecent reports, including the Institute of Medicine's Improving Diagnosis in Health Care, highlight the pervasiveness and underappreciated harm of diagnostic error, and recommend enhancing health care professional education in diagnostic reasoning. However, little is known about clinical reasoning curricula at US medical schools.ObjectiveTo describe clinical reasoning curricula at US medical schools and to determine the attitudes of internal medicine clerkship directors toward teaching of clinical reasoning.DesignCross-sectional multicenter study.ParticipantsUS institutional members of the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine (CDIM).Main measuresExamined responses to a survey that was emailed in May 2015 to CDIM institutional representatives, who reported on their medical school's clinical reasoning curriculum.Key resultsThe response rate was 74% (91/123). Most respondents reported that a structured curriculum in clinical reasoning should be taught in all phases of medical education, including the preclinical years (64/85; 75%), clinical clerkships (76/87; 87%), and the fourth year (75/88; 85%), and that more curricular time should be devoted to the topic. Respondents indicated that most students enter the clerkship with only poor (25/85; 29%) to fair (47/85; 55%) knowledge of key clinical reasoning concepts. Most institutions (52/91; 57%) surveyed lacked sessions dedicated to these topics. Lack of curricular time (59/67, 88%) and faculty expertise in teaching these concepts (53/76, 69%) were identified as barriers.ConclusionsInternal medicine clerkship directors believe that clinical reasoning should be taught throughout the 4 years of medical school, with the greatest emphasis in the clinical years. However, only a minority reported having teaching sessions devoted to clinical reasoning, citing a lack of curricular time and faculty expertise as the largest barriers. Our findings suggest that additional institutional and national resources should be dedicated to developing clinical reasoning curricula to improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce diagnostic error.

Project description:BackgroundHospitals often employ Medical Emergency Teams (METs) to respond to patients with acute physiological decline so as to prevent deaths from in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We determined the frequency of missed opportunities for MET evaluation, defined as no MET evaluation prior to IHCA despite evidence of severe vital sign abnormalities ≥1 hour preceding cardiac arrest.MethodsWithin Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation, we identified 21,913 patients from 274 hospitals with IHCA on general inpatient or telemetry floors who would be eligible for a MET evaluation prior to IHCA. We determined the proportion of patients with missed opportunities for MET evaluation, defined as no MET evaluation before IHCA despite at least 1 severe vital sign abnormality (pulse >150 or <30, respiratory rate >35 or <8, systolic blood pressure <80, and oxygen saturation <80%) 1, 2, and 4 hours before IHCA. The relationship between a hospital's proportion of missed opportunities for MET evaluation and its risk-standardized rate of survival to discharge for IHCA (derived using hierarchical linear regression models) was then evaluated.ResultsOverall, few (3,814 [17.4%]) patients with IHCA had a preceding MET evaluation, and the odds of a MET evaluation varied by >80% across hospitals (median, 14.6% [interquartile range, 9.1%-22.2%]; median odds ratio, 1.82). Vital sign data were available for 13,115 (72.5%) of the 18,099 patients without MET evaluation. Of these patients, 5,243 (40.0%), 4,078 (31.1%), and 1,767 (13.4%) had at least 1 severe vital sign abnormality ≥1, 2, and 4 hours before IHCA, respectively. Hospitals with the highest proportion of unevaluated patients despite severe vital sign abnormalities 2 and 4 hours preceding cardiac arrest had the lowest IHCA survival rate (correlation of -0.14 [P = .04] and -0.16 [P = .01], respectively).ConclusionsAlthough METs are designed to prevent IHCA, many patients with severe vital sign abnormalities prior to IHCA did not have a MET evaluation, and hospitals with higher rates of unevaluated patients had lower IHCA survival. These findings suggest missed opportunities to efficiently use METs in current practice.

Dataset Information

Missed opportunities in the way medical schools evaluate the ethical domain in clerkship rotations.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Missed opportunities in the way medical schools evaluate the ethical domain in clerkship rotations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets