Search

Healthcare inequity is a persistent systemic problem, yet many solutions have historically focused on "debiasing" individuals. Individualistic strategies fit within a competency‐based medical education and assessment paradigm, whereby professional values of social accountability, patient safety, and healthcare equity are linked to an individual clinician's competence. Unfortunately, efforts to realise the conceptual linkages between medical education curricula and goals to improve healthcare equity fail to address the institutional values, policies, and practices that enable structural racism. In this article, we explore alternative approaches that target collective and structural causes of health inequity. We first describe the structural basis of healthcare inequity by identifying the ways in which institutional culture, power and privilege erode patient‐centred care and contribute to epistemic injustice. We then outline some reasons that stereotypes, which are a culturally supported foundation for discrimination, bias and racism in healthcare, cannot be modified effectively through individualistic strategies or education curricula. Finally, we propose a model that centres shared values for leadership by individuals and institutions with consistency in goal setting, knowledge translation, and talent development. Figure 1 summarises the key recommendations. We have provided cases to supplement this work and facilitate discussion about the model's application to practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background As medical education programs transition to competency-based medical education (CBME), experiences transitioning in the context of small subspecialty programs remain unknown, yet they are needed for effective implementation and continual improvements. Objective To examine faculty and resident experiences transitioning to CBME in a small subspeciality program. Methods Using a qualitative descriptive approach and constructivist lens, faculty and residents in McMaster University's geriatric psychiatry subspecialty program were interviewed about their transition experiences between November 2021 and February 2022, after the program's soft launch of CBME in 2020. Interviews were transcribed and data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Reflexive memo writing and investigator and data triangulation strategies were employed to ensure rigor and trustworthiness of the data. Results Ten of the 17 faculty members (59%) and 3 residents (100%) participated. Six themes were developed: (1) Both faculty and residents see themselves as somewhat knowledgeable about CBME, but sources of knowledge vary; (2) More frequent feedback is beneficial; (3) Aspects of CBME that are challenging for residents are beneficial for faculty; (4) Competence committees are perceived positively despite most participants' limited firsthand experience with them; (5) Small program size is both a barrier and facilitator to providing and receiving feedback; and (6) Suggestions for improvement are centered on helping manage faculty and resident workload imposed by CBME. Conclusions Incongruent expectations surrounding entrustable professional activity management were highlighted as an area requiring support. Collegial relationships among faculty and residents made it difficult for faculty to provide constructive feedback but improved residents' perceptions of the feedback. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This commentary is a response to Barradell and Bell's (2021) qualitative research synthesis on the role of students as partners (SaP) in health professions education (HPE), which was recently published in Advances in Health Sciences Education. Through an exploration of some of the challenges and risks of SaP in HPE, the author argues that the uncritical application of SaP carries with it a risk of harm to students and faculty. The commentary ends with suggestions on how the potential of SaP in HPE might be better realized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Construct: The McMaster Modular Assessment Program (McMAP) is a programmatic workplace-based assessment (WBA) system that provides emergency medicine trainees with competency judgments through frequent task-specific and global daily assessments. Background: The longevity of McMAP relative to other programmatic WBA systems affords a unique view that precedes large-scale transitions to competency-based medical education (CBME), particularly in North America. Although prior work has described the perspective of residents using this system, the in-depth experiences of assessors using the system have yet to be explored. This perspective is important for understanding the validity of the competency judgments the system produces. Approach: We conducted a qualitative study that used semi-structured interviews analyzed using interpretive description (Thorne) to explore 16 attending physicians' experiences using McMAP. Data analysis was completed independently by 2 researchers, who met regularly to discuss codes and resolve any disagreements. Results: Having a structured assessment framework for a range of clinical tasks has helped encourage what attendings perceived to be more frequent and better-quality assessments, with the added advantages of being holistic, flexible, and learner-driven. However, attendings also perceived a number of challenges of McMAP and programmatic WBA more broadly. These included a reluctance to give and to document negative feedback, "gaming" of the system by both attendings and residents, and a variety of logistic and technology-related concerns. Conclusions: Based on our findings, we offer several key recommendations that can help programs maximize the benefits of programmatic WBA as they transition to CBME. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Concerns around the time and administrative burden of trainee promotion processes have been reported, making virtual meetings an attractive option for promotions committees in undergraduate and postgraduate medicine. However, whether such meetings can uphold the integrity of decision-making processes has yet to be explored. This narrative review aimed to summarize the literature on decision making in virtual teams, discuss ways to improve the effectiveness of virtual teams, and explore their implications for practice.Methods: In August 2017, the Web of Science platform was searched with the terms ‘decision making’ AND ‘virtual teams’ for articles published within the last 20 years. The search yielded 336 articles, which was narrowed down to a final set of 188 articles. A subset of these, subjectively deemed to be of high-quality and relevant to the work of promotions committees, was included in this review.Results: Virtual team functioning was explored with respect to team composition and development, idea generation and selection, group memory, and communication. While virtual teams were found to potentially offer a number of key benefits over face-to-face meetings including convenience and scheduling flexibility, inclusion of members at remote sites, and enhanced idea generation and external storage, these benefits must be carefully weighed against potential challenges involving planning and coordination, integration of perspectives, and relational conflict among members, all of which can potentially reduce decision-making quality.Discussion: Avenues to address these issues and maximize the outcomes of virtual promotions meetings are offered in light of the evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]