Dataset Information

Assessment of third-year medical students' comfort and preparedness for navigating challenging clinical scenarios with patients, peers, and supervisors.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Medical training focuses heavily on clinical skills but lacks in training for navigating challenging clinical scenarios especially with regard to diversity issues. Our objective was to assess third-year medical students' preparedness to navigate such scenarios. METHODS:A 24-item survey was administered electronically to third-year medical students describing a range of specific interactions with patients, peers, and "upper-levels" or superiors including residents and attendings, spanning subjects including gender, race/ethnicity, politics, age, sexual orientation/identity, disability, and religion. Students rated their level of comfort via a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("Very Uncomfortable") to 5 ("Very Comfortable"). Basic demographics were collected and data were summarized for trends. RESULTS:Data were analyzed from 120 students (67% response rate, 54.2% female, 60.8% non-Hispanic white). Students reported lower comfort with peer and superiors compared to patient interactions (p

SUBMITTER: Kahkoska AR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7068976 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessment of third-year medical students' comfort and preparedness for navigating challenging clinical scenarios with patients, peers, and supervisors.

Kahkoska Anna R AR DeSelm Tracy M TM Young Laura A LA

BMC medical education 20200312 1

<h4>Background</h4>Medical training focuses heavily on clinical skills but lacks in training for navigating challenging clinical scenarios especially with regard to diversity issues. Our objective was to assess third-year medical students' preparedness to navigate such scenarios.<h4>Methods</h4>A 24-item survey was administered electronically to third-year medical students describing a range of specific interactions with patients, peers, and "upper-levels" or superiors including residents and at ...[more]

PMID: 32164733

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStudents may be the first to recognise and respond to psychological distress in other students. Peer support could overcome medical student reluctance to seek help despite their high rates of mental ill-health. Yet, despite the adoption of peer support programs, there is little evidence of impact on students. Peer support programs may assume that medical students accept and view peer support positively. We explored these assumptions by asking students about their experiences and views on peer support.MethodsQualitative semi-structured interviews exploring peer support experiences and views on peer support were conducted with ten medical students at two contrasting medical schools. Informed by a constructivist stance, interview transcripts underwent thematic analysis.ResultsThree groups of themes were identified: participants' experiences of peer support encounters, concerns about providing support, and views on students' roles in peer support. Participants readily recalled signs of peer distress. Encounters were ad hoc, informal, and occurred within relationships based on friendship or by being co-located in the same classes or placements. Concerns about initiating and offering support included lack of expertise, maintaining confidentiality, stigma from a mental health diagnosis, and unclear role boundaries, with implications for acceptance of student roles in peer support.ConclusionsOur study emphasised the centrality of social relationships in enabling or discouraging peer support. Relationships developed during medical studies may anticipate the collegial relationships between medical professionals. Nevertheless, only some students are willing to undertake peer support roles. We suggest different strategies for promoting informal peer support that can be offered by any student, to those promoting formal support roles for selected students. Future research focusing on the impact for both the students who receive, and on the students who provide peer support is called for.

Project description:BackgroundMuch has been written in the educational literature on the value of communities of practise in enhancing student learning. Here, we take the experience of senior undergraduate medical students involved in short-term research as a member of a team as a paradigm for learning in a community of practise. Based on feedback from experienced supervisors, we offer recommendations for initiating students into the research culture of their team. In so doing, we endeavour to create a bridge between theory and practise through disseminating advice on good supervisory practise, where the supervisor is perceived as an educator responsible for designing the research process to optimize student learning.MethodsUsing the questionnaire design tool SurveyMonkey and comprehensive lists of contact details of staff who had supervised research projects at the University of Edinburgh during 1995-2008, current and previous supervisors were invited to recommend procedures which they had found successful in initiating students into the research culture of a team. Text responses were then coded in the form of derivative recommendations and categorized under general themes and sub-themes.ResultsUsing the chi-square tests of linear trend and association, evidence was found for a positive trend towards more experienced supervisors offering responses (?2 = 16.833, p < 0.0005, n = 215) while there was a lack of evidence of bias in the gender distribution of respondents (?2 = 0.482, p = 0.487, n = 203), respectively. A total of 126 codes were extracted from the text responses of 65 respondents. These codes were simplified to form a complete list of 52 recommendations, which were in turn categorized under seven derivative overarching themes, the most highly represented themes being Connecting the student with others and Cultivating self-efficacy in research competence.ConclusionsThrough the design of a coding frame for supervisor responses, a wealth of ideas has been captured to make communities of research practise effective mediums for undergraduate student learning. The majority of these recommendations are underpinned by educational theory and have the potential to take the learner beyond the stage of initiation to that of integration within their community of research practise.

Project description:The mini clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX)-a tool used to assess student-patient encounters-is increasingly being applied as a learning device to foster clinical competencies. Although the importance of eliciting self-assessment for learning is widely acknowledged, little is known about the validity of self-assessed mini-CEX scores. The aims of this study were (1) to explore the variability of medical students' self-assessed mini-CEX scores, and to compare them with the scores obtained from their clinical supervisors, and (2) to ascertain whether learners' self-assessed mini-CEX scores represent a global dimension of clinical competence or discrete clinical skills.In year 4, medical students conducted one to three mini-CEX per clerkship in gynaecology, internal medicine, paediatrics, psychiatry and surgery. Students and clinical supervisors rated the students' performance on a 10-point scale (1?=?great need for improvement; 10?=?little need for improvement) in the six domains history taking, physical examination, counselling, clinical judgement, organisation/efficiency and professionalism as well as in overall performance. Correlations between students' self-ratings and ratings from clinical supervisors were calculated (Pearson's correlation coefficient) based on averaged scores per domain and overall. To investigate the dimensionality of the mini-CEX domain scores, we performed factor analyses using linear mixed models that accounted for the multilevel structure of the data.A total of 1773 mini-CEX from 164 students were analysed. Mean scores for the six domains ranged from 7.5 to 8.3 (student ratings) and from 8.8 to 9.3 (supervisor ratings). Correlations between the ratings of students and supervisors for the different domains varied between r =?0.29 and 0.51 (all p <?0.0001). Mini-CEX domain scores revealed a single-factor solution for both students' and supervisors' ratings, with high loadings of all six domains between 0.58 and 0.83 (students) and 0.58 and 0.84 (supervisors).These findings put a question mark on the validity of mini-CEX domain scores for formative purposes, as neither the scores obtained from students nor those obtained from clinical supervisors unravelled specific strengths and weaknesses of individual students' clinical competence.

Project description:BackgroundText-generating artificial intelligence (AI) such as ChatGPT offers many opportunities and challenges in medical education. Acquiring practical skills necessary for using AI in a clinical context is crucial, especially for medical education.ObjectiveThis explorative study aimed to investigate the feasibility of integrating ChatGPT into teaching units and to evaluate the course and the importance of AI-related competencies for medical students. Since a possible application of ChatGPT in the medical field could be the generation of information for patients, we further investigated how such information is perceived by students in terms of persuasiveness and quality.MethodsChatGPT was integrated into 3 different teaching units of a blended learning course for medical students. Using a mixed methods approach, quantitative and qualitative data were collected. As baseline data, we assessed students' characteristics, including their openness to digital innovation. The students evaluated the integration of ChatGPT into the course and shared their thoughts regarding the future of text-generating AI in medical education. The course was evaluated based on the Kirkpatrick Model, with satisfaction, learning progress, and applicable knowledge considered as key assessment levels. In ChatGPT-integrating teaching units, students evaluated videos featuring information for patients regarding their persuasiveness on treatment expectations in a self-experience experiment and critically reviewed information for patients written using ChatGPT 3.5 based on different prompts.ResultsA total of 52 medical students participated in the study. The comprehensive evaluation of the course revealed elevated levels of satisfaction, learning progress, and applicability specifically in relation to the ChatGPT-integrating teaching units. Furthermore, all evaluation levels demonstrated an association with each other. Higher openness to digital innovation was associated with higher satisfaction and, to a lesser extent, with higher applicability. AI-related competencies in other courses of the medical curriculum were perceived as highly important by medical students. Qualitative analysis highlighted potential use cases of ChatGPT in teaching and learning. In ChatGPT-integrating teaching units, students rated information for patients generated using a basic ChatGPT prompt as "moderate" in terms of comprehensibility, patient safety, and the correct application of communication rules taught during the course. The students' ratings were considerably improved using an extended prompt. The same text, however, showed the smallest increase in treatment expectations when compared with information provided by humans (patient, clinician, and expert) via videos.ConclusionsThis study offers valuable insights into integrating the development of AI competencies into a blended learning course. Integration of ChatGPT enhanced learning experiences for medical students.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Peer-assisted learning is well established in medical education; however, peer tutors rarely act as assessors for the OSCE. In the compulsory, near-peer teaching programme covering basic medical skills at the University of Heidelberg, peer tutors serve as assessors on a formative OSCE. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and acceptance of peer assessors and to survey the perceived advantages and disadvantages of their use. METHODS:In 2016 and 2017 all OSCE peer assessors (third to sixth-year medical students) and all of the peer-assessed students in 2017 (second-year-medical students) were invited to participate in a survey. Both groups were asked to complete a tablet-based questionnaire immediately after the OSCE. Peer assessors were asked to rate eight statements and the peer-assessed students to rate seven statements on a five-point Likert scale. Both were asked to comment on the advantages and disadvantages of peer-assessors. RESULTS:Overall, 74 of 76 peer assessors and 307 of 308 peer-assessed students participated in the study. 94% (67/74) of peer assessors and 90% (276/307) of the peer-assessed group thought that it is important to have peer tutors as assessors. Of the peer assessors, 92% (68/74) felt confident in giving structured feedback during the OSCE and 66% (49/74) felt they had improved their teaching skills. Of the peer-assessed students, 99% (306/307) were satisfied with their peers as OSCE assessors and 96% (292/307) considered the peer feedback during the OSCE as helpful. The participants mentioned structural benefits, such as lower costs, and suggested the quality of the OSCE was higher due to the use of peer assessors. The use of peer assessors was found to be beneficial for the learners in the form of high-quality feedback and an overall reduction in stress. Furthermore, the use of peer assessors was found to be beneficial for the peer assessors (improved teaching and clinical skills). CONCLUSION:From a learner's perspective, the use of peer assessors for a formative OSCE that is part of a near-peer teaching program aimed at junior medical students is favourable for all. A broad implementation of peer assessment in the formative OSCE should be encouraged to investigate effects on quality and stress-reduction.

Dataset Information

Assessment of third-year medical students' comfort and preparedness for navigating challenging clinical scenarios with patients, peers, and supervisors.

Publications

Assessment of third-year medical students' comfort and preparedness for navigating challenging clinical scenarios with patients, peers, and supervisors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets