Search

Threshold concepts (TCs) are increasingly used in health professions education (HPE) research. TCs are claimed to be conceptual gateways which are often traversed with substantial difficulty. In this paper, we report on a scoping review investigating the following research question: What is the scope and nature of the currently available research on threshold concepts in health professions education literature? We employed Arksey and O'Malley's model for scoping reviews. A search for literature on TCs in HPE research between 2003 and 2020 yielded 999 records of which 59 were included in the review. The data set was subject to quantitative descriptive analysis of article characteristics as well as qualitative thematic analysis of the scope of research on TCs. Among the 59 articles selected for review, there were 30 empirical, 26 conceptual and three reviews. A majority were published in 2015 or later. Almost half of the included articles attempted to identify possible TCs within HPE. Others investigated how TCs can be traversed or suggested how TCs could influence curriculum design. Some critically appraised the framework of TC. Although TCs are increasingly utilised in HPE, the present review identified how researchers came across methodological challenges related to identifying possible TCs and definitional challenges around identifying the essential characteristics of TCs. Before embracing TCs as the next go-to theory for learning in HPE, we acknowledge the need for methodological stringeny and rigour as well as more data to support TCs. Until then, any implementation of TCs in HPE curricula should be done cautiously., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Learning environments shape the experiences of learners and practitioners, making them an important component of program evaluation. However, educators find it challenging to decide whether to measure clinical learning environments with existing instruments or to design their own new instrument and, if using an existing instrument, which to choose. To assist educators with these decisions, the authors compared clinical learning environment instruments based on their characteristics, underlying constructs, and degree to which items reflect 4 domains (personal, social, organizational, material) from a recently developed model for conceptualizing learning environments in the health professions. Building on 3 prior literature reviews as well as a literature search, the authors identified 6 clinically oriented learning environment instruments designed for medical education. They collected key information about each instrument (e.g., number of items and subscales, conceptual frameworks, operational definitions of the learning environment) and coded items from each instrument according to the 4 domains. The 6 instruments varied in number of items, underlying constructs, subscales, definitions of clinical learning environment, and domain coverage. Most instruments focused heavily on the organizational and social domains and less on the personal and material domains (half omitted the material domain entirely). The variations in these instruments suggest that educators might consider several guiding questions. How will they define the learning environment and which theoretical lens is most applicable (e.g., personal vitality, sociocultural learning theory)? What aspects or domains of the learning environment do they most wish to capture (e.g., personal support, social interactions, organizational culture, access to resources)? How comprehensive do they want the instrument to be (and correspondingly how much time do they expect people to devote to completing the instrument and how frequently)? Whose perspective do they wish to evaluate (e.g., student, resident, fellow, attending, team, patient)? Each of these considerations is addressed., (Copyright © 2020 by the Association of American Medical Colleges.)

Background: Finding the best way to facilitate student learning in clinical practice can be challenging for clinical supervisors. While high levels of trust might jeopardize patient safety, low trust might hinder student learning; however, carrying out professional activities is necessary for students to develop professional competence. There is a dearth of scholarly literature regarding the concept of trust among clinical supervisors in occupational therapy education. A better understanding of how trust is created between the supervisor and student may thus aid in facilitating student learning. The aim of this study, therefore, was to explore occupational therapy clinical supervisors' perception of trust and how it is formed., Methods: A qualitative method deploying a phenomenographic approach was chosen. Twelve clinical supervisors were interviewed, and the data were analyzed according to the seven-step phenomenographic approach., Results: Three qualitatively different ways of thinking about trust were found: (1) that trust is about the student and is rather static; (2) trust as a dynamic process based on student performance; and (3) trust as something mutual and interrelated. The findings indicate that trust can be understood in various ways, such as being something inherent in the student or, alternatively, about the student, the supervisor, the relationship between them, and the surrounding context, including the tasks performed. Furthermore, the study shows that trust can be seen either as something static or as a dynamic process., Conclusions: This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the variation of ways in which the concept of trust is understood among clinical supervisors in occupational therapy. The study corroborates the prior research finding that trust can be understood as a multifaceted construct. It contributes novel insights about the role of the supervisor as an influential factor in the trust-building process. A deep understanding of the possible differences in the ways of conceptualizing something can help supervisors support learning by building on this understanding. The results from this study contribute to our knowledge of the drivers behind entrusted decisions in clinical education in various professional contexts. We suggest that the results be used in the continuing professional development of clinical supervisors.

Objective: There has been increasing scholarly interest in the role of environments in health care professional education and the value of these has been widely acknowledged as an influential factor in educational quality. However, little is known about how teachers experience the environment and there is a recognizable absence of a perspective from chiropractic and physiotherapy faculties. The aim of this study was to explore and contrast chiropractic and physiotherapy teacher's experiences and conceptualizations of the meaning of the educational environment. Methods: In this qualitative study, we performed semistructured interviews with 14 teachers, purposefully selected to obtain richness, variation and breadth in the data. The data were analyzed using inductive qualitative content analysis. Results: The most noteworthy findings were, first, that chiropractic teachers experienced the meaning of the environment as motivating a vocational practice and modeling ideal, supporting and managing stressed students and including students in the community of chiropractors. Physiotherapy teachers experienced the meaning of the environment as putting the pedagogical vision into practice, balancing student's expectations, and providing the prerequisites to grow within the profession. Second, both groups of teachers held common conceptualizations of the constituents of the environment as physical, organizational, relational, communicational and pedagogical; however, they attached different connotations to these dimensions. Conclusion: The findings conveyed a variance in the experience of the meaning of the educational environment that can be attributed to contextual and cultural differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]