Dataset Information

Understanding the Mentoring Environment Through Thematic Analysis of the Learning Environment in Medical Education: a Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Mentoring's success has been attributed to individualised matching, holistic mentoring relationships (MRs) and personalised mentoring environments (MEs). Whilst there is growing data on matching and MRs, a dearth of ME data has hindered development of mentoring programme. Inspired by studies likening MEs to learning environments (LEs) and data highlighting common characteristics between the two, this systematic review scrutinises reports on LEs to extrapolate the findings to the ME context to provide a better understanding of ME and their role in the mentoring process. METHODS:Using identical search strategies, 6 reviewers carried out independent literature reviews of LEs in clinical medicine published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2015 using PubMed, ERIC, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Google Scholar and Scopus databases. Braun and Clarke's (2006) approach to thematic analysis was adopted to circumnavigate LE's evolving, context-specific, goal-sensitive, learner-tutor relationally dependent nature. RESULTS:A total of 4574 abstracts were identified, 90 articles were reviewed, and 58 full-text articles were thematically analysed. The two themes identified were LE structure and LE culture. LE structure regards the framework that guides interactions within the LE. LE culture concerns the values and practices influencing learner-tutor-host organisation interactions. DISCUSSION:LE is the product of culture and structure that influence and are influenced by the tutor-learner-host organisation relationship. LE structure guides the evolving tutor-learner-host organisation relationship whilst the LE culture nurtures it and oversees the LE structure. Similarities between LEs and MEs allow LE data to inform programme designers of ME's role in mentoring's success.

SUBMITTER: Hee JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6816739 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Understanding the Mentoring Environment Through Thematic Analysis of the Learning Environment in Medical Education: a Systematic Review.

Hee Jia Min JM Yap Hong Wei HW Ong Zheng Xuan ZX Quek Simone Qian Min SQM Toh Ying Pin YP Mason Stephen S Krishna Lalit Kumar Radha LKR

Journal of general internal medicine 20190422 10

<h4>Background</h4>Mentoring's success has been attributed to individualised matching, holistic mentoring relationships (MRs) and personalised mentoring environments (MEs). Whilst there is growing data on matching and MRs, a dearth of ME data has hindered development of mentoring programme. Inspired by studies likening MEs to learning environments (LEs) and data highlighting common characteristics between the two, this systematic review scrutinises reports on LEs to extrapolate the findings to t ...[more]

PMID: 31011975

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBlended learning, which combines face-to-face learning and e-learning, has grown rapidly to be commonly used in education. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of this learning approach has not been completely quantitatively synthesized and evaluated using knowledge outcomes in health education.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of blended learning compared to that of traditional learning in health education.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of blended learning in health education in MEDLINE from January 1990 to July 2019. We independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and compared overall blended learning versus traditional learning, offline blended learning versus traditional learning, online blended learning versus traditional learning, digital blended learning versus traditional learning, computer-aided instruction blended learning versus traditional learning, and virtual patient blended learning versus traditional learning. All pooled analyses were based on random-effect models, and the I2 statistic was used to quantify heterogeneity across studies.ResultsA total of 56 studies (N=9943 participants) assessing several types of learning support in blended learning met our inclusion criteria; 3 studies investigated offline support, 7 studies investigated digital support, 34 studies investigated online support, 8 studies investigated computer-assisted instruction support, and 5 studies used virtual patient support for blended learning. The pooled analysis comparing all blended learning to traditional learning showed significantly better knowledge outcomes for blended learning (standardized mean difference 1.07, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.28, I2=94.3%). Similar results were observed for online (standardized mean difference 0.73, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.86, I2=94.9%), computer-assisted instruction (standardized mean difference 1.13, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.79, I2=78.0%), and virtual patient (standardized mean difference 0.62, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.06, I2=78.4%) learning support, but results for offline learning support (standardized mean difference 0.08, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.79, I2=87.9%) and digital learning support (standardized mean difference 0.04, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.52, I2=93.4%) were not significant.ConclusionsFrom this review, blended learning demonstrated consistently better effects on knowledge outcomes when compared with traditional learning in health education. Further studies are needed to confirm these results and to explore the utility of different design variants of blended learning.

Project description:Computer-based learning (CBL) has been widely used in medical education, and reports regarding its usage and effectiveness have ranged broadly. Most work has been done on the effectiveness of CBL approaches versus traditional methods, and little has been done on the comparative effects of CBL versus CBL methodologies. These findings urged other authors to recommend such studies in hopes of improving knowledge about which CBL methods work best in which settings.In this systematic review, we aimed to characterize recent studies of the development of software platforms and interventions in medical education, search for common points among studies, and assess whether recommendations for CBL research are being taken into consideration.We conducted a systematic review of the literature published from 2003 through 2013. We included studies written in English, specifically in medical education, regarding either the development of instructional software or interventions using instructional software, during training or practice, that reported learner attitudes, satisfaction, knowledge, skills, or software usage. We conducted 2 latent class analyses to group articles according to platform features and intervention characteristics. In addition, we analyzed references and citations for abstracted articles.We analyzed 251 articles. The number of publications rose over time, and they encompassed most medical disciplines, learning settings, and training levels, totaling 25 different platforms specifically for medical education. We uncovered 4 latent classes for educational software, characteristically making use of multimedia (115/251, 45.8%), text (64/251, 25.5%), Web conferencing (54/251, 21.5%), and instructional design principles (18/251, 7.2%). We found 3 classes for intervention outcomes: knowledge and attitudes (175/212, 82.6%), knowledge, attitudes, and skills (11.8%), and online activity (12/212, 5.7%). About a quarter of the articles (58/227, 25.6%) did not hold references or citations in common with other articles. The number of common references and citations increased in articles reporting instructional design principles (P=.03), articles measuring online activities (P=.01), and articles citing a review by Cook and colleagues on CBL (P=.04). There was an association between number of citations and studies comparing CBL versus CBL, independent of publication date (P=.02).Studies in this field vary highly, and a high number of software systems are being developed. It seems that past recommendations regarding CBL interventions are being taken into consideration. A move into a more student-centered model, a focus on implementing reusable software platforms for specific learning contexts, and the analysis of online activity to track and predict outcomes are relevant areas for future research in this field.

Project description:ImportanceConcerns exist about the current quality of undergraduate medical education and its effect on students' well-being.ObjectiveTo identify best practices for undergraduate medical education learning environment interventions that are associated with improved emotional well-being of students.Data sourcesLearning environment interventions were identified by searching the biomedical electronic databases Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ERIC from database inception dates to October 2016. Studies examined any intervention designed to promote medical students' emotional well-being in the setting of a US academic medical school, with an outcome defined as students' reports of well-being as assessed by surveys, semistructured interviews, or other quantitative methods.Data extraction and synthesisTwo investigators independently reviewed abstracts and full-text articles. Data were extracted into tables to summarize results. Study quality was assessed by the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERQSI), which has a possible range of 5 to 18; higher scores indicate higher design and methods quality and a score of 14 or higher indicates a high-quality study.FindingsTwenty-eight articles including at least 8224 participants met eligibility criteria. Study designs included single-group cross-sectional or posttest only (n = 10), single-group pretest/posttest (n = 2), nonrandomized 2-group (n = 13), and randomized clinical trial (n = 3); 89.2% were conducted at a single site, and the mean MERSQI score for all studies was 10.3 (SD, 2.11; range, 5-13). Studies encompassed a variety of interventions, including those focused on pass/fail grading systems (n = 3; mean MERSQI score, 12.0), mental health programs (n = 4; mean MERSQI score, 11.9), mind-body skills programs (n = 7; mean MERSQI score, 11.3), curriculum structure (n = 3; mean MERSQI score, 9.5), multicomponent program reform (n = 5; mean MERSQI score, 9.4), wellness programs (n = 4; mean MERSQI score, 9.0), and advising/mentoring programs (n = 3; mean MERSQI score, 8.2).Conclusions and relevanceIn this systematic review, limited evidence suggested that some specific learning environment interventions were associated with improved emotional well-being among medical students. However, the overall quality of the evidence was low, highlighting the need for high-quality medical education research.

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:To determine if bedside rounds, compared to other forms of hospital ward rounds, improve learning outcomes in medical education. For this systematic review, the authors searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from inception through February 20, 2020. Experimental studies were included if they (1) compared bedside rounds to any other form of rounds in a hospital-based setting, and (2) reported a quantitative comparison of a learning outcome (e.g., learner reaction, knowledge, skills, behavior, health care delivery) among physicians in training (medical students, residents, fellows). Extraction elements were summarized using descriptive statistics and a narrative synthesis of design, implementation, and outcomes. Twenty studies met inclusion criteria, including 7 randomized trials. All studies involved resident physicians, and 11 also involved medical students. The design and implementation of bedside rounds varied widely, with most studies (n = 13) involving cointerventions (e.g., staff education, real-time order entry).Of the 15 studies that reported learner satisfaction, 7 favored bedside rounds, 4 favored the control, and 4 were equivocal. Of the 4 studies reporting an outcome of learners' knowledge and skills, 2 favored bedside rounds and 2 were equivocal. Of the 8 studies that reported on learner behavior (e.g., bedside communication with patients), 5 favored bedside rounds, 1 favored control, and 2 were equivocal. Finally, of the 14 studies that reported a health care delivery outcome (e.g., teamwork, rounding time), 8 favored bedside rounds and 6 were equivocal. Due to the high risk of bias and unexplained heterogeneity across studies, the overall strength of evidence was low. In hospital-based settings, learners' satisfaction with bedside rounds is mixed. However, bedside rounds appear to have a positive effect on learner behavior and health care delivery. Given their potential value, additional research is needed to identify barriers to and facilitators of educationally successful bedside rounds.

Project description:BackgroundWork-integrated learning (WIL) is a core aspect of allied health education. WIL placements typically focus on developing clinical skills, with broader conceptions of work readiness a secondary consideration. Near-peer mentoring (NPM), where senior students mentor junior students, is one WIL placement model that holds promise for developing students' work readiness, along with additional benefits for educators and service users. While there is emerging evidence of the benefits of NPM in allied health, a more comprehensive understanding of the design and outcomes of NPM WIL placements for allied health students, their educators and service users is needed.MethodsA systematic search of seven electronic databases (CINAHL, ERIC, ProQuest Education, Medline, PsychInfo, EMBASE and Scopus) from 2003 to 2022 was conducted with 4195 records reviewed. Included studies reported on near-peer mentoring between at least one of the identified 11 allied health professionals providing services to real people (i.e. not simulation). Data extracted included pedagogical approaches, type of service model and relationship of peers to each other and educator, objectives for implementing the NPM, and effects for students. Quality appraisal was undertaken using the Standards for Reporting of Qualitative Research (SRQR).ResultsFourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority were North American in origin, from the disciplines of pharmacy, physiotherapy, psychology and occupational therapy, and used a range of research designs. Four types of placement design were observed from incidental co-location of students and observing outcomes through to deliberate preparation of students and/or educators for their roles in a NPM placement. Outcomes for junior students included lowered anxiety leading to increased confidence and motivation to learn and thus enhanced clinical skills. Senior student outcomes included development of educator skills, increased confidence, and enhanced professional reasoning. Service users and educators also benefited from NPM; however, evidence was sparse in these areas.ConclusionThe evidence supports near-peer mentoring as a valuable WIL model to support work readiness, and several general pedagogical designs are evident. Future research should design NPM WIL with a greater integration of educational theory and evaluate outcomes beyond satisfaction and self-reported experiences.

Dataset Information

Understanding the Mentoring Environment Through Thematic Analysis of the Learning Environment in Medical Education: a Systematic Review.

Publications

Understanding the Mentoring Environment Through Thematic Analysis of the Learning Environment in Medical Education: a Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets