Dataset Information

Can training in diagnostic radiology be moved online during the COVID-19 pandemic? UK trainee perceptions of the Radiology-Integrated Training Initiative (R-ITI) e-learning platform.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

To assess trainee perceptions of the Radiology-Integrated Training Initiative (R-ITI)) e-learning modules.

Materials and methods

A mixed methodology approach was used, with triangulation between a thematic analysis of eight semi-structured interviews from radiology trainees and trainers, and a contextual analysis of 60 free-text feedback comments and module ratings from trainees after completion of R-ITI modules.

Results

Three broad themes emerged: "learning the subject matter", "learning the role," and "e-learning preferences". Superficial learning techniques were prevalent when "learning the subject matter" during early training, with e-learning resources providing a good pedagogical fit for this learning. Much of what was considered "learning the role" of the radiologist was learned at the workplace. This included topics with inherent subjectivity, which were difficult to convey with e-learning. Trainees' "e-learning preferences" favoured modules that incorporated many imaging cases with layer annotation, clinical relevance, and self-assessment.

Conclusions

The ease of reproducing imaging studies using the R-ITI platform represents a huge potential for e-learning. Content tailored to the learning needs of the trainee, the appropriateness of the subject matter for an online platform, and the design of the e-learning modules are important considerations. Radiology training also involves important tacit learning and discussions around subjective topics, which are difficult to capture on this platform.

SUBMITTER: Upadhyay N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8492024 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Applications for surgical training have declined over the last decade, and anecdotally the costs of training at the expense of the surgical trainee are rising. We aimed to quantify the costs surgical trainees are expected to cover for postgraduate training. DESIGN:Prospective, cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS:A non-mandatory online questionnaire for UK-based trainees was distributed nationally. A similar national questionnaire was distributed for Ireland, taking into account differences between the healthcare systems. Only fully completed responses were included. RESULTS:There were 848 and 58 fully completed responses from doctors based in the UK and Ireland, respectively. Medical students in the UK reported a significant increase in debt on graduation by 55% from £17?892 (2000-2004) to £27?655 (2010-2014) (p<0.01). 41% of specialty trainees in the UK indicated that some or all of their study budget was used to fund mandatory regional teaching. By the end of training, a surgical trainee in the UK spends on average £9105 on courses, £5411 on conferences and £4185 on exams, not covered by training budget. Irish trainees report similarly high costs. Most trainees undertake a higher degree during their postgraduate training. The cost of achieving the mandatory requirements for completion of training ranges between £20 000 and £26?000 (dependent on specialty), except oral and maxillofacial surgery, which is considerably higher (£71 431). CONCLUSIONS:Medical students are graduating with significantly larger debt than before. Surgical trainees achieve their educational requirements at substantial personal expenditure. To encourage graduates to pursue and remain in surgical training, urgent action is required to fund the mandatory requirements and annual training costs for completion of training and provide greater transparency to inform doctors of what their postgraduate training costs will be. This is necessary to increase diversity in surgery, reduce debt load and ensure surgery remains a popular career choice.

Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) technologies are increasingly used in clinical practice. Although there is robust evidence that AI innovations can improve patient care, reduce clinicians' workload and increase efficiency, their impact on medical training and education remains unclear.MethodsA survey of trainee doctors' perceived impact of AI technologies on clinical training and education was conducted at UK NHS postgraduate centers in London between October and December 2020. Impact assessment mirrored domains in training curricula such as 'clinical judgement', 'practical skills' and 'research and quality improvement skills'. Significance between Likert-type data was analysed using Fisher's exact test. Response variations between clinical specialities were analysed using k-modes clustering. Free-text responses were analysed by thematic analysis.ResultsTwo hundred ten doctors responded to the survey (response rate 72%). The majority (58%) perceived an overall positive impact of AI technologies on their training and education. Respondents agreed that AI would reduce clinical workload (62%) and improve research and audit training (68%). Trainees were skeptical that it would improve clinical judgement (46% agree, p = 0.12) and practical skills training (32% agree, p < 0.01). The majority reported insufficient AI training in their current curricula (92%), and supported having more formal AI training (81%).ConclusionsTrainee doctors have an overall positive perception of AI technologies' impact on clinical training. There is optimism that it will improve 'research and quality improvement' skills and facilitate 'curriculum mapping'. There is skepticism that it may reduce educational opportunities to develop 'clinical judgement' and 'practical skills'. Medical educators should be mindful that these domains are protected as AI develops. We recommend that 'Applied AI' topics are formalized in curricula and digital technologies leveraged to deliver clinical education.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of administrative data in health and social science research continues to expand, with increased availability of data and interest from funders. Researchers, however, continue to experience delays in access, storage and sharing of administrative data. Training opportunities are limited and typically specific to individual data providers or focussed on the analytical aspects of working with administrative data. The CENTRIC study was funded by the Information Commissioners Office, with the aim of developing a broader training curriculum for researchers working with administrative data in the UK.MethodsA mixed-methods design informed curriculum content, including surveys with researchers, focus group discussions with data providers and workshops with members of the public. Researchers were identified from relevant administrative data networks and invited to participate in an online survey identifying training needs. Data providers were approached with a request to input to a face-to-face or online meeting with two members of the research team about their experiences of working with researchers. Data were analysed within the broad framework of the interview schedule, free text responses in the survey were analysed thematically.Results107 researchers responded to the online survey and four data providers participated in the focus groups. We identified five main themes, relating to research training needs for UK researchers working with administrative data: communication; timelines; changes & amendments; future-proofing applications; and, the availability of training and support. Data providers either provided additional evidence on these learning needs or ways to address identified challenges. Six modules were developed addressing these training needs. Quotes from the survey and focus groups are used anonymously in the online training modules.ConclusionThe CENTRIC online training curriculum was launched in September 2020 and is available, free of charge for UK researchers. CENTRIC specifically addresses commonly identified training needs of researchers working with administrative data.