项目PRIME(国际医学选修课的心理社会反应):医学学员的结果。

IF 5.1 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Annals of Global Health Pub Date : 2025-03-10 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.5334/aogh.4627
Nicole E St Clair, Kristina Devi Singh-Verdeflor, Vanessa McFadden, Elizabeth Groothuis, Stephanie Lauden, Megan S McHenry, Stephen Merry, Stephen Warrick, Samantha L Wilson, James H Conway
{"title":"项目PRIME(国际医学选修课的心理社会反应):医学学员的结果。","authors":"Nicole E St Clair, Kristina Devi Singh-Verdeflor, Vanessa McFadden, Elizabeth Groothuis, Stephanie Lauden, Megan S McHenry, Stephen Merry, Stephen Warrick, Samantha L Wilson, James H Conway","doi":"10.5334/aogh.4627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background:</i> Participation in global health (GH) training experiences is common for US medical trainees (students, residents, and fellows). However, little is known about their experience of \"culture shock\" (CS), which frequently occurs during these transformative cross‑cultural immersions. <i>Objectives:</i> The objectives of this study include: (1) quantitatively measure medical trainee psychosocial responses to short‑term GH electives, (2) identify factors that influence their CS experiences, and (3) determine if the stage‑based CS conceptual framework applies to medical trainees. <i>Methods:</i> Undergraduate and graduate medical education trainees (UME and GME) who participated in short‑term GH electives between 2016 and 2020 were recruited across nine US institutions. Using a longitudinal survey method, we gathered data predeparture (demographics, resilience, perceived stress (PS), and CS assessments), every 5 days during the elective (CS, PS assessments, and training site conditions), and 30 days postreturn (perceptions of CS experiences). Analyses included summary statistics, linear regressions, and a linear mixed effects model (LMM). <i>Findings:</i> 252 trainees were enrolled, with 140 (56%) included in the LMM. The primary outcome was a culture shock profile (CSP) score, with 96% reporting CS. The only trainee‑specific factor that significantly increased CSP score was trainee type (UME > GME (+22%)). Several GH elective site‑specific factors significantly influenced CSP score (e.g., support network [-10%], role clarity [-11%], and overwhelmed by medical needs [+10%]). CS experiences were variable and did not progress in predictable, stage‑based fashions, which is discordant from common CS descriptions. <i>Conclusions:</i> Culture shock was a near‑universal, diverse experience during GH electives. On‑site training conditions and elective site host factors influenced CS more than trainee factors in this prepandemic cohort. Further research is required to (1) determine the optimal CS \"balance\" (i.e., promoting transformative learning while mitigating negative professional and personal impacts), (2) offer insight into harmful CS thresholds, (3) identify host perspectives, and (4) inform best practices for GH electives and global partnerships.</p>","PeriodicalId":48857,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Global Health","volume":"91 1","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11908413/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Project PRIME (Psychosocial Response to International Medical Electives): Results from Medical Trainees.\",\"authors\":\"Nicole E St Clair, Kristina Devi Singh-Verdeflor, Vanessa McFadden, Elizabeth Groothuis, Stephanie Lauden, Megan S McHenry, Stephen Merry, Stephen Warrick, Samantha L Wilson, James H Conway\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/aogh.4627\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Background:</i> Participation in global health (GH) training experiences is common for US medical trainees (students, residents, and fellows). However, little is known about their experience of \\\"culture shock\\\" (CS), which frequently occurs during these transformative cross‑cultural immersions. <i>Objectives:</i> The objectives of this study include: (1) quantitatively measure medical trainee psychosocial responses to short‑term GH electives, (2) identify factors that influence their CS experiences, and (3) determine if the stage‑based CS conceptual framework applies to medical trainees. <i>Methods:</i> Undergraduate and graduate medical education trainees (UME and GME) who participated in short‑term GH electives between 2016 and 2020 were recruited across nine US institutions. Using a longitudinal survey method, we gathered data predeparture (demographics, resilience, perceived stress (PS), and CS assessments), every 5 days during the elective (CS, PS assessments, and training site conditions), and 30 days postreturn (perceptions of CS experiences). Analyses included summary statistics, linear regressions, and a linear mixed effects model (LMM). <i>Findings:</i> 252 trainees were enrolled, with 140 (56%) included in the LMM. The primary outcome was a culture shock profile (CSP) score, with 96% reporting CS. The only trainee‑specific factor that significantly increased CSP score was trainee type (UME > GME (+22%)). Several GH elective site‑specific factors significantly influenced CSP score (e.g., support network [-10%], role clarity [-11%], and overwhelmed by medical needs [+10%]). CS experiences were variable and did not progress in predictable, stage‑based fashions, which is discordant from common CS descriptions. <i>Conclusions:</i> Culture shock was a near‑universal, diverse experience during GH electives. On‑site training conditions and elective site host factors influenced CS more than trainee factors in this prepandemic cohort. Further research is required to (1) determine the optimal CS \\\"balance\\\" (i.e., promoting transformative learning while mitigating negative professional and personal impacts), (2) offer insight into harmful CS thresholds, (3) identify host perspectives, and (4) inform best practices for GH electives and global partnerships.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Global Health\",\"volume\":\"91 1\",\"pages\":\"13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11908413/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4627\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4627","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:参与全球健康(GH)培训经验对美国医学实习生(学生、住院医生和研究员)来说很常见。然而,他们对“文化冲击”(CS)的经历知之甚少,这在这些变革性的跨文化沉浸中经常发生。目的:本研究的目的包括:(1)定量测量医疗实习生对短期GH选修课程的心理社会反应,(2)确定影响他们CS经历的因素,以及(3)确定基于阶段的CS概念框架是否适用于医疗实习生。方法:从美国9所机构招募2016年至2020年间参加短期GH选修课的本科和研究生医学教育学员(UME和GME)。采用纵向调查方法,我们收集了出发前(人口统计学、弹性、感知压力(PS)和CS评估)、选修课期间每5天(CS、PS评估和培训场地条件)和回归后30天(CS经验感知)的数据。分析包括汇总统计、线性回归和线性混合效应模型(LMM)。结果:252名受训者入组,其中140名(56%)纳入LMM。主要结果是文化冲击(CSP)评分,96%的患者报告了文化冲击。唯一显著提高CSP评分的受训人员特定因素是受训人员类型(UME > GME(+22%))。几个GH选择性部位特异性因素显著影响CSP评分(例如,支持网络[-10%],角色清晰度[-11%]和医疗需求不堪重负[+10%])。CS经验是可变的,并没有以可预测的、基于阶段的方式发展,这与常见的CS描述不一致。结论:在GH选修课中,文化冲击几乎是一种普遍的、多样化的体验。在大流行前队列中,现场培训条件和可选场地宿主因素对CS的影响大于学员因素。需要进一步的研究来(1)确定最佳的计算机科学“平衡”(即,在促进变革学习的同时减轻对专业和个人的负面影响),(2)洞察有害的计算机科学阈值,(3)确定主机观点,(4)为计算机科学选修课和全球合作伙伴关系提供最佳实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Project PRIME (Psychosocial Response to International Medical Electives): Results from Medical Trainees.

Background: Participation in global health (GH) training experiences is common for US medical trainees (students, residents, and fellows). However, little is known about their experience of "culture shock" (CS), which frequently occurs during these transformative cross‑cultural immersions. Objectives: The objectives of this study include: (1) quantitatively measure medical trainee psychosocial responses to short‑term GH electives, (2) identify factors that influence their CS experiences, and (3) determine if the stage‑based CS conceptual framework applies to medical trainees. Methods: Undergraduate and graduate medical education trainees (UME and GME) who participated in short‑term GH electives between 2016 and 2020 were recruited across nine US institutions. Using a longitudinal survey method, we gathered data predeparture (demographics, resilience, perceived stress (PS), and CS assessments), every 5 days during the elective (CS, PS assessments, and training site conditions), and 30 days postreturn (perceptions of CS experiences). Analyses included summary statistics, linear regressions, and a linear mixed effects model (LMM). Findings: 252 trainees were enrolled, with 140 (56%) included in the LMM. The primary outcome was a culture shock profile (CSP) score, with 96% reporting CS. The only trainee‑specific factor that significantly increased CSP score was trainee type (UME > GME (+22%)). Several GH elective site‑specific factors significantly influenced CSP score (e.g., support network [-10%], role clarity [-11%], and overwhelmed by medical needs [+10%]). CS experiences were variable and did not progress in predictable, stage‑based fashions, which is discordant from common CS descriptions. Conclusions: Culture shock was a near‑universal, diverse experience during GH electives. On‑site training conditions and elective site host factors influenced CS more than trainee factors in this prepandemic cohort. Further research is required to (1) determine the optimal CS "balance" (i.e., promoting transformative learning while mitigating negative professional and personal impacts), (2) offer insight into harmful CS thresholds, (3) identify host perspectives, and (4) inform best practices for GH electives and global partnerships.

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
Annals of Global Health
Annals of Global Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.40%
发文量
95
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: ANNALS OF GLOBAL HEALTH is a peer-reviewed, open access journal focused on global health. The journal’s mission is to advance and disseminate knowledge of global health. Its goals are improve the health and well-being of all people, advance health equity and promote wise stewardship of the earth’s environment. The journal is published by the Boston College Global Public Health Program. It was founded in 1934 by the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai as the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine. It is a partner journal of the Consortium of Universities for Global Health.
期刊最新文献
Integrated Determinants of Maternal Healthcare Decisions: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Predisposing, Enabling, and Illness-Level Factors in Bo District, Sierra Leone. Conflict-Driven Displacement and the Risk of Infectious Disease Outbreaks in the Middle East. Maternal Anthropometric and Obstetric Risk Factors for Small-for-Gestational-Age Births in Anuradhapura District, Sri Lanka: A Retrospective Case-Control Study. Understanding US-based Clinician Participation in Global Pediatric Hematology-Oncology Work: A Mixed-Methods Study. Costing of AMR can Incentivize Responses to One Health.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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