Defining Success Across the Stages of the Back to Bedside Cycle: Reflections From the Third Cohort

从重返病床循环的各个阶段定义成功:第三批学员的反思

阅读:2

Abstract

Background Although Clinical Competency Committees (CCCs) were implemented to facilitate the goals of competency-based medical education, implementation has been variable, and we do not know if and how these committees affected programs and assessment in graduate medical education (GME). Objective To explore the roles CCCs fulfill in GME and their effect on trainees, faculty, and programs. Methods We conducted a narrative review of CCC primary research with the following inclusion criteria: all articles must be research in nature, focused on GME and specifically studying CCCs, and published in English language journals from January 2013 to November 2022. Results The main results are as follows: (1) The primary role of the CCC (decision-making on trainee progress) is mostly described in "snapshots" (ie, focusing on a single aspect of this role at a single point in time); (2) CCCs are taking on secondary roles, some of which were anticipated (eg, remediation, feedback) whereas others were "unanticipated" (eg, use of CCC data to validate trainee self-assessment, predict trainee performance in other settings such as certifying examinations, investigate gender bias in assessment); and (3) Articles briefly mentioned short-term outcomes of CCCs at the level of the trainees, faculty, and programs. However, most studies described interventions to aid CCC work and did not specifically aim at investigating short-term (eg, curriculum changes) or long-term outcomes (eg, improved patient outcomes). Conclusions CCCs fulfill a range of roles in assessment beyond their intended purpose. A more systematic approach is needed to investigate the outcomes of CCC implementation on GME.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。