医学教育的盲点--国际视角。

IF 3.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Medical Teacher Pub Date : 2024-04-30 DOI:10.1080/0142159X.2024.2345271
Sean Tackett, Yvonne Steinert, Susan Mirabal, Darcy A Reed, Cynthia R Whitehead, Scott M Wright
{"title":"医学教育的盲点--国际视角。","authors":"Sean Tackett, Yvonne Steinert, Susan Mirabal, Darcy A Reed, Cynthia R Whitehead, Scott M Wright","doi":"10.1080/0142159X.2024.2345271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>All individuals and groups have blind spots that can create problems if unaddressed. The goal of this study was to examine blind spots in medical education from international perspectives.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From December 2022 to March 2023, we distributed an electronic survey through international networks of medical students, postgraduate trainees, and medical educators. Respondents named blind spots affecting their medical education system and then rated nine blind spot domains from a study of U.S. medical education along five-point Likert-type scales (1 = much less attention needed; 5 = much more attention needed). We tested for differences between blind spot ratings by respondent groups. We also analyzed the blind spots that respondents identified to determine those not previously described and performed content analysis on open-ended responses about blind spot domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 356 respondents from 88 countries, including 127 (44%) educators, 80 (28%) medical students, and 33 (11%) postgraduate trainees. At least 80% of respondents rated each blind spot domain as needing 'more' or 'much more' attention; the highest was 88% for 'Patient perspectives and voices that are not heard, valued, or understood.' In analyses by gender, role in medical education, World Bank country income level, and region, a mean difference of 0.5 was seen in only five of the possible 279 statistical comparisons. Of 885 blind spots documented, new blind spot areas related to issues that crossed national boundaries (e.g. international standards) and the sufficiency of resources to support medical education. Comments about the nine blind spot domains illustrated that cultural, health system, and governmental elements influenced how blind spots are manifested across different settings.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There may be general agreement throughout the world about blind spots in medical education that deserve more attention. This could establish a basis for coordinated international effort to allocate resources and tailor interventions that advance medical education.</p>","PeriodicalId":18643,"journal":{"name":"Medical Teacher","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blind spots in medical education - International perspectives.\",\"authors\":\"Sean Tackett, Yvonne Steinert, Susan Mirabal, Darcy A Reed, Cynthia R Whitehead, Scott M Wright\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0142159X.2024.2345271\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>All individuals and groups have blind spots that can create problems if unaddressed. The goal of this study was to examine blind spots in medical education from international perspectives.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From December 2022 to March 2023, we distributed an electronic survey through international networks of medical students, postgraduate trainees, and medical educators. Respondents named blind spots affecting their medical education system and then rated nine blind spot domains from a study of U.S. medical education along five-point Likert-type scales (1 = much less attention needed; 5 = much more attention needed). We tested for differences between blind spot ratings by respondent groups. We also analyzed the blind spots that respondents identified to determine those not previously described and performed content analysis on open-ended responses about blind spot domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 356 respondents from 88 countries, including 127 (44%) educators, 80 (28%) medical students, and 33 (11%) postgraduate trainees. At least 80% of respondents rated each blind spot domain as needing 'more' or 'much more' attention; the highest was 88% for 'Patient perspectives and voices that are not heard, valued, or understood.' In analyses by gender, role in medical education, World Bank country income level, and region, a mean difference of 0.5 was seen in only five of the possible 279 statistical comparisons. Of 885 blind spots documented, new blind spot areas related to issues that crossed national boundaries (e.g. international standards) and the sufficiency of resources to support medical education. Comments about the nine blind spot domains illustrated that cultural, health system, and governmental elements influenced how blind spots are manifested across different settings.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There may be general agreement throughout the world about blind spots in medical education that deserve more attention. This could establish a basis for coordinated international effort to allocate resources and tailor interventions that advance medical education.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18643,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Teacher\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Teacher\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2345271\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Teacher","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2345271","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:所有个人和群体都有盲点,如果不加以解决,就会产生问题。本研究旨在从国际视角审视医学教育中的盲点:从 2022 年 12 月到 2023 年 3 月,我们通过医科学生、研究生学员和医学教育工作者的国际网络发放了一份电子调查问卷。受访者说出了影响其医学教育体系的盲点,然后根据美国医学教育研究中的九个盲点领域,按照五点李克特量表进行评分(1 = 不需要太多关注;5 = 需要更多关注)。我们测试了不同受访者群体对盲点评价的差异。我们还对受访者指出的盲点进行了分析,以确定那些以前没有描述过的盲点,并对有关盲点领域的开放式回答进行了内容分析:来自 88 个国家的 356 名受访者,包括 127 名(44%)教育工作者、80 名(28%)医学生和 33 名(11%)研究生学员。至少有 80% 的受访者认为每个盲点领域都需要 "更多 "或 "更多 "的关注;"病人的观点和声音未被倾听、重视或理解 "的受访者比例最高,达到 88%。在按性别、在医学教育中的角色、世界银行国家收入水平和地区进行的分析中,在可能进行的 279 次统计比较中,只有 5 次出现了 0.5 的平均差异。在记录的 885 个盲点中,新的盲点领域涉及跨越国界的问题(如国际标准)和支持医学教育的资源是否充足。对九个盲点领域的评论表明,文化、卫生系统和政府因素影响着盲点在不同环境下的表现形式:讨论:全世界对医学教育盲点的看法可能基本一致,这些盲点值得更多关注。这可以为协调国际努力奠定基础,以分配资源和定制干预措施,促进医学教育的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Blind spots in medical education - International perspectives.

Background: All individuals and groups have blind spots that can create problems if unaddressed. The goal of this study was to examine blind spots in medical education from international perspectives.

Methods: From December 2022 to March 2023, we distributed an electronic survey through international networks of medical students, postgraduate trainees, and medical educators. Respondents named blind spots affecting their medical education system and then rated nine blind spot domains from a study of U.S. medical education along five-point Likert-type scales (1 = much less attention needed; 5 = much more attention needed). We tested for differences between blind spot ratings by respondent groups. We also analyzed the blind spots that respondents identified to determine those not previously described and performed content analysis on open-ended responses about blind spot domains.

Results: There were 356 respondents from 88 countries, including 127 (44%) educators, 80 (28%) medical students, and 33 (11%) postgraduate trainees. At least 80% of respondents rated each blind spot domain as needing 'more' or 'much more' attention; the highest was 88% for 'Patient perspectives and voices that are not heard, valued, or understood.' In analyses by gender, role in medical education, World Bank country income level, and region, a mean difference of 0.5 was seen in only five of the possible 279 statistical comparisons. Of 885 blind spots documented, new blind spot areas related to issues that crossed national boundaries (e.g. international standards) and the sufficiency of resources to support medical education. Comments about the nine blind spot domains illustrated that cultural, health system, and governmental elements influenced how blind spots are manifested across different settings.

Discussion: There may be general agreement throughout the world about blind spots in medical education that deserve more attention. This could establish a basis for coordinated international effort to allocate resources and tailor interventions that advance medical education.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Teacher
Medical Teacher 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.50%
发文量
396
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Teacher provides accounts of new teaching methods, guidance on structuring courses and assessing achievement, and serves as a forum for communication between medical teachers and those involved in general education. In particular, the journal recognizes the problems teachers have in keeping up-to-date with the developments in educational methods that lead to more effective teaching and learning at a time when the content of the curriculum—from medical procedures to policy changes in health care provision—is also changing. The journal features reports of innovation and research in medical education, case studies, survey articles, practical guidelines, reviews of current literature and book reviews. All articles are peer reviewed.
期刊最新文献
Integration of behavioral, social, and humanities sciences into healthcare and education and their alignment with medical education programs. Submitting artificial intelligence in health professions education papers to medical teacher. Transformative power of an early ICU internship: A reflection from our undergraduate medical students. Medical education challenges in Mainland China: An analysis of the application of problem-based learning. Transforming remediation for competency-based medical education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1