IF 1.6 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES International Journal of Medical Education Pub Date : 2025-02-24 DOI:10.5116/ijme.679e.0509
Ellen Allaert, Marieke Robbrecht, Tjalina Hamerlynck, Steven Weyers
{"title":"Development of a competency framework for postgraduate training in obstetrics and gynaecology using a Delphi study.","authors":"Ellen Allaert, Marieke Robbrecht, Tjalina Hamerlynck, Steven Weyers","doi":"10.5116/ijme.679e.0509","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to create a new integrated competency framework for the postgraduate training in obstetrics and gynaecology and to reach consensus through a Delphi study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the Canadian Medical Education Directives for Specialists (CanMEDS) framework as a basis, three existing frameworks were merged by screening for keywords. Subsequently, consensus on the unified framework was reached through a Delphi study: a group of 18 Belgian experts was asked for their opinions on the competencies through three successive questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the first round, one of the in total 91 competencies was deemed irrelevant. In the second round, the competencies were reviewed for content and formulation, after which consensus was not reached on 15 competencies. These 15 competencies were adjusted as needed based on comments collected during the first two rounds. The adjusted competencies were then sent back to the experts in the third round, resulting in a final consensus on all 91 competencies. However, the comments indicated that several competencies were considered broad or vague, casting doubt on their practical applicability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Through a Delphi study, consensus was reached on a newly composed competency framework. Such a holistic competency framework can form the basis of a curriculum reform in the postgraduate training in obstetrics and gynaecology within Belgium, but also in a more international context. Further research is needed to develop an assessment tool to implement these competencies in practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":14029,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Education","volume":"16 ","pages":"21-35"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.679e.0509","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究旨在为妇产科研究生培训创建一个新的综合能力框架,并通过德尔菲研究达成共识:方法:以加拿大专科医生医学教育指令(CanMEDS)框架为基础,通过筛选关键词合并了三个现有框架。随后,通过德尔菲研究就统一框架达成共识:一组 18 名比利时专家通过连续三份调查问卷征求他们对能力的意见:结果:在第一轮调查中,总共 91 项能力中有一项被认为是不相关的。在第二轮调查中,对能力的内容和表述进行了审查,结果有 15 项能力没有达成共识。根据前两轮收集到的意见,对这 15 项能力进行了必要的调整。调整后的能力又在第三轮中发给专家,最终就所有 91 项能力达成了共识。不过,评论意见表明,有几项能力被认为是宽泛或模糊的,使人对其实际适用性产生怀疑:结论:通过德尔菲研究,就新组成的能力框架达成了共识。这种全面的能力框架不仅可以作为比利时妇产科研究生培训课程改革的基础,还可以在更广泛的国际背景下使用。为在实践中落实这些能力,还需要进一步研究开发评估工具。
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
Development of a competency framework for postgraduate training in obstetrics and gynaecology using a Delphi study.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to create a new integrated competency framework for the postgraduate training in obstetrics and gynaecology and to reach consensus through a Delphi study.

Methods: Using the Canadian Medical Education Directives for Specialists (CanMEDS) framework as a basis, three existing frameworks were merged by screening for keywords. Subsequently, consensus on the unified framework was reached through a Delphi study: a group of 18 Belgian experts was asked for their opinions on the competencies through three successive questionnaires.

Results: In the first round, one of the in total 91 competencies was deemed irrelevant. In the second round, the competencies were reviewed for content and formulation, after which consensus was not reached on 15 competencies. These 15 competencies were adjusted as needed based on comments collected during the first two rounds. The adjusted competencies were then sent back to the experts in the third round, resulting in a final consensus on all 91 competencies. However, the comments indicated that several competencies were considered broad or vague, casting doubt on their practical applicability.

Conclusions: Through a Delphi study, consensus was reached on a newly composed competency framework. Such a holistic competency framework can form the basis of a curriculum reform in the postgraduate training in obstetrics and gynaecology within Belgium, but also in a more international context. Further research is needed to develop an assessment tool to implement these competencies in practice.

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
International Journal of Medical Education
International Journal of Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
3.20%
发文量
38
期刊最新文献
Perceptions of the usefulness of an online simulated clinical examination. Psychometric properties of the Feedback Orientation Scale in the clinical workplace of health professions students. Development of a competency framework for postgraduate training in obstetrics and gynaecology using a Delphi study. Changing landscape of medical conferences: identifying the goals motivating virtual vs in-person participation. Assessing shared decision-making: a case study of third-year medical student standardized patient encounters.
×
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