Search

COVID-19 struck the world and stretched the healthcare system and professionals. Medical students engaged in the pandemic effort, making personal and professional sacrifices. However, the impact of these sacrifices on students' professional development is still unknown. We applied constructivist grounded theory to individual audio diaries (total time = 5h38 min) and interviews (total time = 11h57min) performed with 18 last-year medical students during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. The perspective of making sacrifices caused initial emotional distress in medical students, followed by a negotiation process revolving around three themes: predisposition to sacrifice, sense of competence, and sense of belonging. This negotiation process led to three response patterns: Pattern A: "No sense of duty"--the sacrifice was perceived as meaningless, and students showed intense anger and a desire to flee; Pattern B: "Sense of duty with hesitation to act"--the sacrifice was acknowledged as legitime, but students felt unprepared to contribute, leading to feelings of frustration and shame; and, Pattern C: "Sense of duty with readiness to act"--the engagement with the sacrifice was perceived as an opportunity to grow as a doctor, leading to fulfillment and proudness. Students ready to engage with the COVID-19 effort experienced identity consonance, reinforcing their professional identities. Students who felt incompetent or found the sacrifice meaningless experienced identity dissonance, which led to emotional suffering and the consideration of abandoning the course. Monitoring students' emotional reactions when facing professional challenges creates opportunities to problematize the role of sacrifice in the medical profession and scaffold professional identity development.

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged medical educators internationally to confront the challenges of adapting their present educational activities to a rapidly evolving digital world. In this article, the authors use anatomy education as proxy to reflect on and remap the past, present, and future of medical education in the face of these disruptions. Inspired by the historical Theatrum Anatomicum (Anatomy 1.0), the authors argue replacing current anatomy dissection laboratory (Anatomy 2.0) with a prototype anatomy studio (Anatomy 3.0). In this studio, anatomists are web-performers who not only collaborate with other foundational science educators to devise meaningful and interactive content but who also partner with actors, directors, web-designers, computer engineers, information technologists, and visual artists to master online interactions and processes in order to optimize students' engagement and learning. This anatomy studio also offers students opportunities to create their own online content and thus reposition themselves digitally, a step into developing a new competency of stage presence within medical education. So restructured, Anatomy 3.0 will prepare students with the skills to navigate an emergent era of tele and digital medicine as well as help to foreshadow forthcoming changes in medical education.

Background Diagnostic errors have been attributed to reasoning flaws caused by cognitive biases. While experiments have shown bias to cause errors, physicians of similar expertise differed in susceptibility to bias. Resisting bias is often said to depend on engaging analytical reasoning, disregarding the influence of knowledge. We examined the role of knowledge and reasoning mode, indicated by diagnosis time and confidence, as predictors of susceptibility to anchoring bias. Anchoring bias occurs when physicians stick to an incorrect diagnosis triggered by early salient distracting features (SDF) despite subsequent conflicting information. Methods Sixty-eight internal medicine residents from two Dutch university hospitals participated in a two-phase experiment. Phase 1: assessment of knowledge of discriminating features (ie, clinical findings that discriminate between lookalike diseases) for six diseases. Phase 2 (1 week later): diagnosis of six cases of these diseases. Each case had two versions differing exclusively in the presence/absence of SDF. Each participant diagnosed three cases with SDF (SDF+) and three without (SDF-). Participants were randomly allocated to case versions. Based on phase 1 assessment, participants were split into higher knowledge or lower knowledge groups. Main outcome measurements: frequency of diagnoses associated with SDF; time to diagnose; and confidence in diagnosis. Results While both knowledge groups performed similarly on SDF- cases, higher knowledge physicians succumbed to anchoring bias less frequently than their lower knowledge counterparts on SDF+ cases (p=0.02). Overall, physicians spent more time (p<0.001) and had lower confidence (p=0.02) on SDF+ than SDF-cases (p<0.001). However, when diagnosing SDF+ cases, the groups did not differ in time (p=0.88) nor in confidence (p=0.96). Conclusions Physicians apparently adopted a more analytical reasoning approach when presented with distracting features, indicated by increased time and lower confidence, trying to combat bias. Yet, extended deliberation alone did not explain the observed performance differences between knowledge groups. Success in mitigating anchoring bias was primarily predicted by knowledge of discriminating features of diagnoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Feedback is crucial to promote learning and improve performance. However, we lack a nuanced understanding of how medical teachers reflect on and internalise (or not) student feedback (SF). This study aims to fill this gap by exploring how teachers make sense of SF to improve their performance and nurture their personal and professional development. Methods: In this cross‐sectional qualitative study based on a constructivist paradigm, 14 medical teachers individually drew a Rich Picture (RP) of a feedback experience in which they received informal or formal feedback from students, resulting in a personal or professional change. After the drawing, we interviewed the participants to deepen our understanding of teachers' experiences. We analysed the drawings and interview transcripts using an iterative process of thematic analysis. Results: SF that culminated in personal or professional change is a highly emotional experience for teachers, often with long‐lasting consequences. It may threaten or reassure their self‐concept and professional identity, generating feedback avoidance or feedback‐seeking behaviour. SF is particularly powerful in transforming teaching practices when teachers feel connected to students through an honest and constructive relationship. Remarkably, some teachers intentionally build relationships with certain (selected) students to get 'qualified' feedback. SF acceptance also increases when teachers are open to receiving feedback and there is an institutional culture that values feedback. Finally, medical teachers believe that formal (planned) feedback is relevant to improve the curriculum, while informal (spontaneous) feedback is important for promoting teachers' personal and professional development. Discussion: SF has the potential to become a transformative learning experience for teachers. The student–teacher relationship and teachers' emotional reactions affect the way teachers make sense of and internalise SF and enact behavioural change. Understanding the complexity surrounding SF is vital for supporting teachers in seizing opportunities for growth and in nurturing a meaningful relationship with the act of teaching. Receiving students' feedback is detailed to be an emotional process that happens in the context of a relationship and can nurture teachers' professional and personal development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the concept of improvisation in various contexts, including jazz music and capoeira. It challenges the common perception of improvisation as a suboptimal response to unforeseen circumstances and instead presents it as a continuous, artful process of creating that involves active participation and embraces complexity and uncertainty. The authors argue that an improvisational mindset is crucial in both medical education and clinical practice, as it allows for the recognition and integration of unseen elements that are essential for providing effective care. They propose that the use of arts, such as drama and music, can help develop this mindset and create safe spaces for meaningful conversations. [Extracted from the article]