我们做得怎么样?对美国学生开办的免费诊所已发表的以患者为中心的结果研究进行范围界定。

IF 2.1 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Teaching and Learning in Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-12 DOI:10.1080/10401334.2023.2245805
Francesca Silvestri, George Mellgard, Jonathan Goldstein, Susmita Chennareddy, Justin Tang, Michelle Tran, Isabelle Band, Daniel Qian, Sean Fischer, Abigail Castillo, Joy Jiang, David Skovran, David Thomas, Yasmin S Meah
{"title":"我们做得怎么样?对美国学生开办的免费诊所已发表的以患者为中心的结果研究进行范围界定。","authors":"Francesca Silvestri, George Mellgard, Jonathan Goldstein, Susmita Chennareddy, Justin Tang, Michelle Tran, Isabelle Band, Daniel Qian, Sean Fischer, Abigail Castillo, Joy Jiang, David Skovran, David Thomas, Yasmin S Meah","doi":"10.1080/10401334.2023.2245805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Phenomenon</i></b>: Student-run free clinics (SRFCs) serve an integral role in most United States (US) medical schools and contribute substantially to literature on the quality of care to uninsured persons. There has been substantial growth over the past decade of scholarly work produced by SRFCs as they have increased in size and number. Research on patient care outcomes informs better care structures for patients, however there is no current synthesis of patient care outcomes research among SRFCs. This article provides an overview of SRFC research on patient outcomes to understand current research domains and to identify gaps in the literature. <b><i>Approach</i></b>: We completed a scoping review by searching Scopus, PubMed, and Journal of Student Run Clinics in June 2021. All peer-reviewed, English-language articles focused on patient-centered outcomes at SRFCs in the US were included. Two independent reviewers performed title, abstract, and full-text screening of relevant works, and eight reviewers conducted data extraction. Descriptive data analysis was performed along with relevant content analysis of patient-centered outcomes. <b><i>Findings</i></b>: The search strategy identified 784 studies, of which 87 met inclusion criteria. Most studies were published within the last six years (81.6%), located in California, New York, or Florida (43.7%), and intervention based (33.3%). Many studies (46.0%) had a specific disease of focus of which diabetes was the most researched(19.5%). Patient-centered studies were the leading focus of the study aims (40.2%), where key findings demonstrated primarily improved outcomes in clinic metrics post-intervention (36.8%) or equivalent/better clinical performance than national metrics (20.7%). <b><i>Insights</i></b>: This review brings to light gaps in the literature reporting research in SRFCs and can be applied to other low-resource settings. Future efforts to expand SRFC outcomes research should focus on community relationship building, understanding institutional support, and ensuring education on best practices for research within SRFCs. Doing so informs patient care improvement as SRFCs continue to operate as safety net clinics for marginalized populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":51183,"journal":{"name":"Teaching and Learning in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"624-636"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Are We Doing? A Scoping Review of Published Patient-Centered Outcomes Research in United States Student-Run Free Clinics.\",\"authors\":\"Francesca Silvestri, George Mellgard, Jonathan Goldstein, Susmita Chennareddy, Justin Tang, Michelle Tran, Isabelle Band, Daniel Qian, Sean Fischer, Abigail Castillo, Joy Jiang, David Skovran, David Thomas, Yasmin S Meah\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10401334.2023.2245805\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Phenomenon</i></b>: Student-run free clinics (SRFCs) serve an integral role in most United States (US) medical schools and contribute substantially to literature on the quality of care to uninsured persons. There has been substantial growth over the past decade of scholarly work produced by SRFCs as they have increased in size and number. Research on patient care outcomes informs better care structures for patients, however there is no current synthesis of patient care outcomes research among SRFCs. This article provides an overview of SRFC research on patient outcomes to understand current research domains and to identify gaps in the literature. <b><i>Approach</i></b>: We completed a scoping review by searching Scopus, PubMed, and Journal of Student Run Clinics in June 2021. All peer-reviewed, English-language articles focused on patient-centered outcomes at SRFCs in the US were included. Two independent reviewers performed title, abstract, and full-text screening of relevant works, and eight reviewers conducted data extraction. Descriptive data analysis was performed along with relevant content analysis of patient-centered outcomes. <b><i>Findings</i></b>: The search strategy identified 784 studies, of which 87 met inclusion criteria. Most studies were published within the last six years (81.6%), located in California, New York, or Florida (43.7%), and intervention based (33.3%). Many studies (46.0%) had a specific disease of focus of which diabetes was the most researched(19.5%). Patient-centered studies were the leading focus of the study aims (40.2%), where key findings demonstrated primarily improved outcomes in clinic metrics post-intervention (36.8%) or equivalent/better clinical performance than national metrics (20.7%). <b><i>Insights</i></b>: This review brings to light gaps in the literature reporting research in SRFCs and can be applied to other low-resource settings. Future efforts to expand SRFC outcomes research should focus on community relationship building, understanding institutional support, and ensuring education on best practices for research within SRFCs. Doing so informs patient care improvement as SRFCs continue to operate as safety net clinics for marginalized populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51183,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Teaching and Learning in Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"624-636\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Teaching and Learning in Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2023.2245805\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teaching and Learning in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2023.2245805","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

现象:学生开办的免费诊所(SRFCs)在大多数美国医学院中发挥着不可或缺的作用,并为有关无保险者医疗质量的文献做出了巨大贡献。在过去十年中,随着免费诊所规模和数量的增加,免费诊所的学术成果也有了大幅增长。有关病人护理结果的研究为病人提供了更好的护理结构,但是目前还没有SRFCs病人护理结果研究的综述。本文概述了 SRFC 对患者护理效果的研究,以了解当前的研究领域并找出文献中的空白。方法:我们在 2021 年 6 月通过搜索 Scopus、PubMed 和《学生跑步诊所期刊》完成了范围审查。所有经同行评审的、以美国 SRFCs 患者为中心的结果为主题的英文文章均被收录。两名独立审稿人对相关文章进行了标题、摘要和全文筛选,八名审稿人进行了数据提取。在对以患者为中心的结果进行相关内容分析的同时,还进行了描述性数据分析。研究结果搜索策略确定了 784 项研究,其中 87 项符合纳入标准。大多数研究发表于过去六年内(81.6%),位于加利福尼亚州、纽约州或佛罗里达州(43.7%),以干预为基础(33.3%)。许多研究(46.0%)关注特定疾病,其中糖尿病研究最多(19.5%)。以患者为中心的研究是研究目的的主要重点(40.2%),其主要研究结果表明,干预后的临床指标(36.8%)或与国家指标相当/更好的临床表现(20.7%)主要得到了改善。启示:本综述揭示了报告 SRFC 研究的文献中存在的不足,并可应用于其他低资源环境。今后扩大 SRFC 成果研究的工作重点应放在社区关系建设、了解机构支持以及确保 SRFC 内研究最佳实践的教育上。在 SRFC 继续作为边缘化人群的安全网诊所运营的过程中,这样做有助于改善患者护理。
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
How Are We Doing? A Scoping Review of Published Patient-Centered Outcomes Research in United States Student-Run Free Clinics.

Phenomenon: Student-run free clinics (SRFCs) serve an integral role in most United States (US) medical schools and contribute substantially to literature on the quality of care to uninsured persons. There has been substantial growth over the past decade of scholarly work produced by SRFCs as they have increased in size and number. Research on patient care outcomes informs better care structures for patients, however there is no current synthesis of patient care outcomes research among SRFCs. This article provides an overview of SRFC research on patient outcomes to understand current research domains and to identify gaps in the literature. Approach: We completed a scoping review by searching Scopus, PubMed, and Journal of Student Run Clinics in June 2021. All peer-reviewed, English-language articles focused on patient-centered outcomes at SRFCs in the US were included. Two independent reviewers performed title, abstract, and full-text screening of relevant works, and eight reviewers conducted data extraction. Descriptive data analysis was performed along with relevant content analysis of patient-centered outcomes. Findings: The search strategy identified 784 studies, of which 87 met inclusion criteria. Most studies were published within the last six years (81.6%), located in California, New York, or Florida (43.7%), and intervention based (33.3%). Many studies (46.0%) had a specific disease of focus of which diabetes was the most researched(19.5%). Patient-centered studies were the leading focus of the study aims (40.2%), where key findings demonstrated primarily improved outcomes in clinic metrics post-intervention (36.8%) or equivalent/better clinical performance than national metrics (20.7%). Insights: This review brings to light gaps in the literature reporting research in SRFCs and can be applied to other low-resource settings. Future efforts to expand SRFC outcomes research should focus on community relationship building, understanding institutional support, and ensuring education on best practices for research within SRFCs. Doing so informs patient care improvement as SRFCs continue to operate as safety net clinics for marginalized populations.

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
Teaching and Learning in Medicine
Teaching and Learning in Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
12.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Teaching and Learning in Medicine ( TLM) is an international, forum for scholarship on teaching and learning in the health professions. Its international scope reflects the common challenge faced by all medical educators: fostering the development of capable, well-rounded, and continuous learners prepared to practice in a complex, high-stakes, and ever-changing clinical environment. TLM''s contributors and readership comprise behavioral scientists and health care practitioners, signaling the value of integrating diverse perspectives into a comprehensive understanding of learning and performance. The journal seeks to provide the theoretical foundations and practical analysis needed for effective educational decision making in such areas as admissions, instructional design and delivery, performance assessment, remediation, technology-assisted instruction, diversity management, and faculty development, among others. TLM''s scope includes all levels of medical education, from premedical to postgraduate and continuing medical education, with articles published in the following categories:
期刊最新文献
Psychometric properties of the Ethiopian national licensing exam in medicine: an analysis of multiple-choice questions using classical test theory. Disability Education for Health Personnel and Impact on Health Outcomes for Persons with Autism: A Scoping Review. Examining Scientific Inquiry of Queerness in Medical Education: A Queer Reading. "I have established this support network": How Chosen Kin Support Women Medical Students During their First Two Years in Medical School. Applying the Panarchy Framework to Examining Post-Pandemic Adaptation in the Undergraduate Medical Education Environment: A Qualitative Study.
×
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