Search

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, medical education institutions were suddenly and unexpectedly faced with making significant changes in delivering their clinical assessments to comply with social distancing requirements and limited access to clinical education centres. Seeking a potential solution to these new circumstances, we designed, implemented and evaluated an online virtual OSCE, as a 'proof of concept' intervention study. Our qualitative research involved document analysis of the stages of decision-making and consultation in designing the intervention, and thematic analysis based on the perspectives and experiences of the key stakeholders (final year students, clinical examiners, simulated patients and faculty staff who acted as station assistants), gathered through surveys with Likert-scale questions and free text comments, and online discussion groups which were recorded and transcribed. From our analysis, we identified four themes: optimising assessment design for online delivery, ensuring clinical authenticity, recognising and addressing feelings and apprehensions, and anticipating challenges through incident planning and risk mitigation. Through the data gathered at each stage of the intervention, and the involvement of key stakeholders in the design and evaluation, our study highlights examples of effective practice for future applications of online technologies in assessment, provides guidance for designing and implementing online virtual assessment, and lays a foundation for comparative, longitudinal research on the significant and increasing roles played by technology in healthcare professional education and practice.

Peer-led assessment (PLA) has gained increasing prominence within health professions education as an effective means of engaging learners in the process of assessment writing and practice. Involving students in various stages of the assessment lifecycle, including item writing, quality assurance, and feedback, not only facilitates the creation of high-quality item banks with minimal faculty input but also promotes the development of students' assessment literacy and fosters their growth as teachers. The advantages of involving students in the generation of assessments are evident from a pedagogical standpoint, benefiting both students and faculty. However, faculty members may face uncertainty when it comes to implementing such approaches effectively. To address this concern, this paper presents twelve tips that offer guidance on important considerations for the successful implementation of peer-led assessment schemes in the context of health professions education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For example, work exploring learner engagement on a peer-assessment platform found that activating a gamification feature (virtual badges) significantly increased learner engagement.[9] In other analyses, learners reported that gamification enhanced their enjoyment of the learning process.[7] 1 TABLE Tools to gamify peer-led assessment. Learners therefore see their efforts rewarded in the virtual or real world ht Incorporating gamification into the scheme offers a helpful way to incentivise and maintain ongoing learner engagement. There is a growing body of evidence demonstrating that gamification can enhance learner engagement and enjoyment, especially considering the ubiquity of technological devices among learners. PLA is a student-driven approach that involves learners in all stages of the assessment design process. [Extracted from the article]

As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, medical education institutions were suddenly and unexpectedly faced with making significant changes in delivering their clinical assessments to comply with social distancing requirements and limited access to clinical education centres. Seeking a potential solution to these new circumstances, we designed, implemented and evaluated an online virtual OSCE, as a 'proof of concept' intervention study. Our qualitative research involved document analysis of the stages of decision-making and consultation in designing the intervention, and thematic analysis based on the perspectives and experiences of the key stakeholders (final year students, clinical examiners, simulated patients and faculty staff who acted as station assistants), gathered through surveys with Likert-scale questions and free text comments, and online discussion groups which were recorded and transcribed. From our analysis, we identified four themes: optimising assessment design for online delivery, ensuring clinical authenticity, recognising and addressing feelings and apprehensions, and anticipating challenges through incident planning and risk mitigation. Through the data gathered at each stage of the intervention, and the involvement of key stakeholders in the design and evaluation, our study highlights examples of effective practice for future applications of online technologies in assessment, provides guidance for designing and implementing online virtual assessment, and lays a foundation for comparative, longitudinal research on the significant and increasing roles played by technology in healthcare professional education and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Empathy is a core skill essential to patient‐centred care. Yet a decline in empathy throughout undergraduate medical education is well recognised. The mainstay of existing teaching approaches to foster medical students' empathic ability has largely focused on the cognitive domain of empathy within the context of communication skills learning. However, there is growing evidence for educational initiatives that better evoke students' affective emotional responses. Approach: A student‐led educational initiative was created to enhance medical students' understanding of empathy through undertaking different experiential approaches. Eight medical students were invited to participate in an empathy workshop that involved two experiential approaches: personal simulation, and patient narrative, selected given their expected focus on the affective domain. Evaluation: A subsequent focus group discussion explored students' reactions, learning, and intended future change in practice. Discussions were coded and analysed for descriptive themes. Both initiatives were reported to generate students' empathic responses. Personal simulation evoked more affective domains whilst patient narratives additionally created cognitive empathic insight into the impact of the patient's condition. Students also reported intended changes to their future consulting practices. Conclusions: Although this is a small‐scale exploration of medical students' experiences of empathy‐related teaching initiatives, it offers insight into how each initiative could target different aspects of empathy. Data support the use of even brief experiential teaching to improve medical students' empathy during their undergraduate training. We provide recommendations for clinical educators who are considering designing similar initiatives within their undergraduate medical curricula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor of the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology discusses an audit conducted at a large General Practice in the United Kingdom to determine if patients at risk for serotonin syndrome were being adequately advised. The audit found that out of 148 patients identified as being at risk, only 36 (24%) had documented evidence of receiving specific safety netting advice regarding serotonin syndrome. The authors recommend implementing educational interventions and integrating alerts into patient record systems to improve medication counseling practices. [Extracted from the article]

The result was a CR curriculum map depicting learners' development and application of CR skills in a structured, scaffolded and progressive manner (Table 1). Keywords: clinical reasoning; curriculum development; faculty development EN clinical reasoning curriculum development faculty development 184 194 11 05/12/22 20220501 NES 220501 Background Clinical reasoning (CR) is defined as a process wherein clinicians observe, collect, and interpret data to diagnose and treat patients [[1]], [[2]]. The group constituted individuals with programme leadership roles, knowledge of curriculum development, assessment, and CR, medical students and resident doctors. [Extracted from the article]

This AMEE guide provides a robust framework and practical strategies for health professions educators to enhance their writing skills and engage in successful scholarship within a collaborative writing team. Whether scholarly output involves peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, blogs and online posts, online educational resources, collaborative writing requires more than the usual core writing skills, it requires teamwork, leadership and followership, negotiation, and conflict resolution, mentoring and more. Whilst educators can attend workshops or courses to enhance their writing skills, there may be fewer opportunities to join a community of scholars and engage in successful collaborative writing. There is very little guidance on how to find, join, position oneself and contribute to a writing group. Once individuals join a group, further questions arise as to how to contribute, when and whom to ask for help, whether their contribution is significant, and how to move from the periphery to the centre of the group. The most important question of all is how to translate disparate ideas into a shared key message and articulate it clearly. In this guide, we describe the value of working within a collaborative writing group; reflect on principles that anchor the concept of writing as a team and guide team behaviours; suggest explicit strategies to overcome challenges and promote successful writing that contributes to and advances the field; and review challenges to starting, maintaining, and completing writing tasks. We approach writing through three lenses: that of the individual writer, the writing team, and the scholarly product, the ultimate goal being meaningful contributions to the field of Health Professions Education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholarship in Health Professions Education is not just original research, it also includes study of educational processes, and application of new knowledge to practice. The pathways to successful scholarship are not always clear to novice educators. In this article, we describe strategies to establish a Community of Scholars (CoS), where more experienced and senior members guide junior members in scholarship to advance the field. Drawing on Lave and Wenger's concepts of Communities of Practice (CoP), we describe twelve practical tips, which include generation of a shared vision, formation of a global community of scholars, engagement in scholarly initiatives, and development of a professional identity, categorised under three major steps: establish, grow, and sustain the community. The tips embrace inclusivity for diverse cultural contexts which further provide opportunities for Health Professions Educators, interested in forming communities of practice, to work on scholarly outputs and add value to the professional arena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This guide provides an understanding of what teacher identity is and how it can be developed and supported. Developing a strong teacher identity in the context of health professions education is challenging, because teachers combine multiple roles and the environment usually is more supportive to the identity of health practitioner or researcher than to that of teacher. This causes tensions for those with a teaching role. However, a strong teacher identity is important because it enhances teachers' intention to stay in health professions education, their willingness to invest in faculty development, and their enjoyment of the teaching role. The guide offers recommendations on how to establish workplace environments that support teacher identity rather than marginalise it. Additionally, the guide offers recommendations for establishing faculty development approaches that are sensitive to teacher identity issues. Finally, the guide provides suggestions for individual teachers in relation to what they can do themselves to nurture it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Those setting objective structured clinical exams (OSCEs) are likely to encounter candidates who dispute the examiners' scores and feedback. At our own institution, candidates have requested video recording to aid in later academic appeals. Before ceding to such requests, we wished to be certain that the marking of recorded OSCEs would give comparable results to live marking, and that technical challenges could be met within reasonable cost. Methods: We adopted a mixed‐methods approach to explore the use of video recording OSCEs. Following an initial literature review, we surveyed and interviewed the assessment leads of UK medical schools and postgraduate institutions setting high stakes OSCEs to explore their views and experience in using recordings as part of summative OSCE assessments. Results: Results from our literature review reveal inconsistent findings about the comparability of marks awarded from video marking and those awarded by examiner in‐station marking, with suggestions that video marking generates lower scores. The majority of UK medical education institutions were neither videoing OSCEs nor considering doing so. Many logistical and assessor‐related drawbacks to video review were identified, with significant concerns raised about how such a process could be feasibly managed. Discussion: Although the videoing of OSCEs may superficially appear an easy solution to provide defensibility of the process, the potential use is beset with challenge, going beyond purely logistical and technical difficulties. The use of videoing for the purpose of OSCE appeals is not currently supported by the literature, nor by the majority of UK undergraduate and postgraduate medical education institutions delivering high‐stakes summative OSCEs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]