Search

Objective: At the Medical Faculty of the Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, the elective course “climate change and health” was offered to students in the clinical phase of their medical studies for the first time in the winter semester 2021/22 (any unfilled places were made available to interested students studying other subjects). Despite attracting considerable attention, this topic has not yet been incorporated into the curriculum of medical studies. Our aim was therefore to teach students about climate change and discuss its effects on human health. The students evaluated the elective in terms of various factors relating to knowledge, attitudes and behavior.Project description: The elective focused on the concept of Planetary Health, with an emphasis on the health consequences of climate change, as well as possibilities for action and adaptation in clinical and practical settings. The course took place in three live, online sessions (with inputs, discussion, case studies and work in small groups), as well as online preparation and a final written assignment for which students were asked to reflect on the subject. The standardized teaching evaluation questionnaire (=didactic dimension) of Goethe University was used online to evaluate the elective, whereby the questionnaire was extended to include the measurement of changes in students’ agreement with items (dimensions) relating to knowledge, attitudes and behavior (personal behavior and behavior as physicians) before and after the course (pre/post comparison).Results: Students expressed high levels of satisfaction with the course content, the presentation of the course, and the organization of the elective. This was reflected in very good to good overall ratings. The pre/post comparisons further showed a significant, positive shift in agreement ratings in almost all dimensions. The majority of respondents also wanted the topic to be firmly embedded in the medical curriculum. Conclusion: The evaluation shows that with respect to the impact of climate change on human health, the elective course had a clear influence on the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of the students. In view of the relevance of the topic, it is therefore important that this subject is included in medical curricula in the future.

Introduction: Patient and public involvement is vital for high‐quality research. Integrating patients' and providers' perspectives early in research enhances the feasibility and relevance of study results. Within our family practice‐based research network ForN, we established a standing patient advisory board (PAB) to include patients with diverse conditions and experiences. In this paper, we aim to describe the establishment and functioning of a standing PAB in family medicine research from patients' and researchers' perspectives. Methods: After each PAB meeting, patients and researchers were asked to name anonymously positive and challenging moments in a feedback form with open questions. Researchers were also asked to reflect on how they implemented the discussion content in their research projects. The responses from both groups were transferred to MAXQDA 2018 and analyzed separately using thematic analysis. Results: We analyzed 40 feedback forms from patients and 14 feedback forms from researchers. The dominant theme in the patients' feedback was 'exchange': They positively emphasized the 'exciting and open discussions' and the exchange of perspectives with one another and researchers. The clarity of the researchers' presentations and the research topics were appreciated. Researchers also positively highlighted the open atmosphere of the discussions. Presenting their research to the PAB helped most researchers reflect on their research topics from patients' perspectives and implement changes. However, researchers also mentioned several barriers to the implementation of PAB members' feedback. Conclusion: The establishment of a standing PAB in family practice research is feasible and productive both from patients' and researchers' perspectives. Patient or Public Contribution: This study reports the evaluation of the establishment of a standing PAB in family practice research. Board members are involved in the design of studies, the co‐production of interventions and information material, and the interpretation of data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

General practices are rooted in the local community and considered to be particularly well‐positioned for engaging in preventive and health‐promoting activities. The overall aim of the scoping review is to identify priorities and gaps in research published in the past 20 years on preventive and health‐promoting activities provided by general practitioners or their teams in general practices in Germany. MEDLINE and Embase databases were systematically searched in November 2020. Papers were selected in dual‐review mode and extracted in single‐review mode. Data analysis was finished by May 2021. In total, 530 papers were included in the synthesis. Little research has been carried out into collaboration opportunities both within the general practice team and in communities as a whole, with specialists (18%), hospitals (9%), and health insurance companies (6%) being the most frequent cooperation partners of GPs. 15%–20% of papers each dealt with 'early detection', 'information provision' and 'cardiovascular prevention'. Secondary (53%) and tertiary prevention (43%) was more often the subject of research than primary (39%) and quaternary prevention (15%). Healthy subjects (26%) were less often studied than people with pre‐existing conditions (42%) and risk factors (48%). Little information was available on preventive activities in terms of gender, young people, migration background, housing conditions or educational background. Personal counselling (15%) was the most frequently described approach to health promotion in general practices, along with printed information materials (10%). This scoping review provides information on which to base targeted interventions and future research that can contribute towards transforming general practices into promoters of health within the community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]