Dataset Information

Final-year medical students' competence profiles according to the modified requirement tracking questionnaire.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Undergraduate medical education is supposed to equip medical students with basic competences to select any specialty of their choice for postgraduate training. Medical specialties are characterized by a great diversity of their daily work routines and require different sets of competence facets. This study examines the self-assessed competence profiles of final-year undergraduate medical students and their specialty choice for postgraduate training. Students' profiles, who wish to choose anaesthesiology, internal medicine, or paediatrics, are compared with the physicians' competence profiles from these three disciplines.

Methods

In this study, 148 volunteer final-year undergraduate medical students completed the modified requirement-tracking (R-Track) questionnaire for self-assessment of their competence profiles. The R-Track questionnaire contains 63 competence facets assigned to six areas of competence: "Mental abilities", "Sensory abilities", "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities", "Social interactive competences", "Motivation", and "Personality traits". The expression of the different competence facets had to be assessed on a 5-point Likert scale (1: "very low" to 5: "very high"). Additionally, socio-demographic data and the participants' first choice of a medical speciality for postgraduate education were collected. We used analysis of variance (ANOVA) for mean score comparison of subgroups and least significant difference (LSD) tests for post hoc analysis.

Results

The competence area with the highest rating was "Motivation" (3.70 ± 0.47) while "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities" received the lowest rating (3.34 ± 0.68). Individual facets of competence ranked from "In need of harmony" (4.36 ± 0.72), followed by "Tactfulness" (4.26 ± 0.64), and "Cooperation/Agreeableness" (4.24 ± 0.53) to "Risk orientation" (2.90 ± 0.92), "Mathematical reasoning" (2.87 ± 1.25), and "Sanctioning" (2.26 ± 0.93). The students' competence profiles showed 100 % congruence with physicians' competence profiles of the postgraduate specialty of their choice for internal medicine, 33.3 % for paediatrics, and 0 % for anaesthesiology.

Conclusions

Undergraduate medical students could define their competence profiles with the modified R-Track questionnaire and compare them with the profile of their desired specialty for postgraduate training to discover possible learning gaps or to detect good specialty matches. A combination of students' competence self-assessment with an external assessment of students' facets of competence could provide curricular planners with useful information how to design learning opportunities for specific facets of competence.

SUBMITTER: Zelesniack E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8178874 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFinal-year undergraduate medical students often do not feel well prepared for their start of residency training. Self-assessment of competences is important so that medical trainees can take responsibility for their learning. In this study, we investigated how final-year medical students self-assessed their competences as they neared their transition to postgraduate training. The aim was to identify areas for improvement in undergraduate training.MethodsIn the academic year 2019/2020, a national online survey was sent to final-year undergraduate medical students via their respective medical schools. The survey included ten facets of competence (FOC) most relevant for beginning residents. The participants were asked to self-assess their competence for each FOC on a 5-point Likert scale (1: strongly disagree to 5: strongly agree). We established an order of self-assessed FOC performance by means and calculated paired t-tests. Gender differences were assessed with independent t-tests.ResultsA total of 1083 students from 35 medical schools completed the questionnaire. Mean age was 27.2 ± 3.1 years and 65.8% were female. Students rated their performance highest in the FOCs 'Teamwork and collegiality' and 'Empathy and openness' (97.1 and 95.0% 'strongly agree' or 'agree', respectively) and lowest in 'Verbal communication with colleagues and supervisors' and 'Scientifically and empirically grounded method of working' (22.8 and 40.2% 'strongly disagree', 'disagree', or 'neither agree nor disagree', respectively). Women rated their performance of 'Teamwork and collegiality', 'Empathy and openness', and 'Knowing and maintaining own personal bounds and possibilities' significantly higher than men did (Cohen's d > .2), while men showed higher self-assessed performance in 'Scientifically and empirically grounded method of working' than women (Cohen's d = .38). The FOCs 'Responsibility', 'Knowing and maintaining own personal bounds and possibilities', 'Structure, work planning, and priorities', 'Coping with mistakes', and 'Scientifically and empirically grounded method of working' revealed lower self-assessed performance than the order of FOC relevance established by physicians for beginning residents.ConclusionsThe differences between the level of students' self-assessed FOC performance and physicians' ranking of FOC relevance revealed areas for improvement in undergraduate medical education related to health system sciences. Final-year students might benefit from additional or better training in management skills, professionalism, and evidence-based medicine. Surveys of self-assessed competences may be useful to monitor competence development during undergraduate training.

Project description:BackgroundThe medical specialities chosen by doctors for their careers play an important part in the workforce planning of health-care services. However, there is little theoretical understanding of how different medical specialities are perceived or how choices are made, despite there being much work in general on this topic in occupational psychology, which is influenced by Holland's RIASEC (Realistic-Investigative-Artistic-Social-Enterprising-Conventional) typology of careers, and Gottfredson's model of circumscription and compromise. In this study, we use three large-scale cohorts of medical students to produce maps of medical careers.MethodsInformation on between 24 and 28 specialities was collected in three UK cohorts of medical students (1981, 1986 and 1991 entry), in applicants (1981 and 1986 cohorts, N = 1135 and 2032) or entrants (1991 cohort, N = 2973) and in final-year students (N = 330, 376, and 1437). Mapping used Individual Differences Scaling (INDSCAL) on sub-groups broken down by age and sex. The method was validated in a population sample using a full range of careers, and demonstrating that the RIASEC structure could be extracted.ResultsMedical specialities in each cohort, at application and in the final-year, were well represented by a two-dimensional space. The representations showed a close similarity to Holland's RIASEC typology, with the main orthogonal dimensions appearing similar to Prediger's derived orthogonal dimensions of 'Things-People' and 'Data-Ideas'.ConclusionsThere are close parallels between Holland's general typology of careers, and the structure we have found in medical careers. Medical specialities typical of Holland's six RIASEC categories are Surgery (Realistic), Hospital Medicine (Investigative), Psychiatry (Artistic), Public Health (Social), Administrative Medicine (Enterprising), and Laboratory Medicine (Conventional). The homology between medical careers and RIASEC may mean that the map can be used as the basis for understanding career choice, and for providing career counselling.

Project description:BackgroundMatching between undergraduate students and their chosen specialty has implications for their personal job satisfaction and performance as well as societies' needs regarding health care quality. Knowledge regarding student-specialty fit can help improve students' decisions and detect potential deficiencies in specific competences. In this study, we compare self-assessed competence profiles of medical students close to graduation with the competence profiles of their specialty of choice for postgraduate training.MethodsSelf-assessed competence profiles were collected with the modified requirement-tracking (R-Track) questionnaire from 197 final-year medical students close to graduation in 2022. To determine student-specialty fit, difference scores between students' self-assessed competences and physicians' requirements for specific specialties were calculated across the R-Track's six competence areas "Motivation", "Personality traits", "Social interactive competences", "Mental abilities", "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities", and "Sensory abilities", which were assessed on a 5-point Likert scale (1: "very low" to 5: "very high"). Mean difference scores across competence areas were calculated and compared between specialties with multivariate analysis of variance. Student-specialty fit was also calculated independent of students' choices.ResultsThe competence area "Motivation" scored highest for both students and physicians across specialties. However, students' scores were lower than physicians' requirements for "Motivation" as well as "Personality traits" across all specialties. Difference scores for "Social interactive competences" were either close to zero or showed higher scores for students. A similar competence pattern for internal medicine, general medicine, paediatrics, and gynaecology was identified with higher than required student scores for "Mental abilities", "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities", and "Sensory abilities". All other specialties showed higher physicians' requirements for at least one of these competence areas. Independent of students' specialty choice, we found the highest difference score in favour of student scores for general medicine (0.31) and the lowest difference score for internal medicine (-0.02).ConclusionsStudents' competence profiles overall show better fit with person-oriented specialties. "Mental abilities", "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities", and "Sensory abilities" show higher requirement scores for more technique-oriented specialties. Students interested in such specialties could focus more on basic skill development in undergraduate training or will develop specific skills during residency.

Project description:BackgroundThe final year of medical training in Germany is one of the least structured and standardized years of medical school. Medical students often complain about a lack of guidance, supervision and feedback. They are mostly asked to perform delegable nonmedical tasks even though student experiences in this period critically determine future decisions for certain medical specialties. Consequently, right from the beginning many young professionals feel overburdened especially by the time pressure of everyday clinical practice. The planned amendment of the medical licensing regulations will make competence-based training even more important. This article therefore aims to examine the extent to which a mentoring-based curriculum with workplace-based examinations during the final year of medical studies can make a valuable contribution to this.MethodsAfter a needs assessment (structured literature search, results evaluation and focus groups with both students and medical specialists), a mentoring-based curriculum for final year medical students was developed following the Kern cycle. In 2 work sessions 10 discipline-specific competencies for the fields of anesthesiology, critical care, emergency and pain medicine were established and prioritized, which had to be mastered by every student independently at the end of the training period. Assessment of these competencies was performed on a regular basis by trained mentors in the form of workplace-based assessments (mini-clinical evaluation exercise, mini-CEX, direct observation of procedural skills, DOPS). Multiperspective evaluation was and is the foundation of continuous program development. By September 2019 a total of 40 students had completed the modified curriculum and were subsequently interviewed online about various aspects of the tertial.ResultsThe response rate to the survey was 80% (n = 32). The gender ratio was balanced (male = 50%, female = 50%). Prioritization and assessment of 10 competencies by trained mentors enabled a focused, demand-driven and high-quality training of final year medical students. Surveyed students found the section mentoring and feedback to be very positive and it supported their learning success (grade 1.5). Despite firmly established feedback structures, in retrospect almost half (51.6%) wanted more structured feedback. Workplace-based assessments were mostly previously unknown (64.6%) but were experienced as helpful and meaningful (76.7%). Students felt confident and prepared for the final state examination (81.3%) and their career start (71.0%) after being part of the program. These findings were accompanied by a high level of satisfaction (grade 1.7) as well as a high recommendation rate for this institution (as a training program for final year medical students and as a career start for residents, both with 93.7%). Thus, the good evaluation results of the department before the start of the project could again be slightly improved.ConclusionA demand-driven, mentoring-based curriculum with integrated workplace-based assessments not only led to high overall student satisfaction but also promoted the quality of teaching in an effective and resource-saving way. Mentoring promotes learning success mainly through feedback and individual learning support and also supports the communicative and social skills of students and mentors alike.