Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive and implicit biases negatively impact clinicians' decision-making capacity and can have devastating consequences for safe, effective, and equitable healthcare provision. Internationally, health care clinicians play a critical role in identifying and overcoming these biases. To be workforce ready, it is important that educators proactively prepare all pre-registration healthcare students for real world practice. However, it is unknown how and to what extent health professional educators incorporate bias training into curricula. To address this gap, this scoping review aims to explore what approaches to teaching cognitive and implicit bias, for entry to practice students, have been studied, and what are the evidence gaps that remain. METHODS: This scoping review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. Databases were searched in May 2022 and included CINAHL, Cochrane, JBI, Medline, ERIC, Embase, and PsycINFO. The Population, Concept and Context framework was used to guide keyword and index terms used for search criteria and data extraction by two independent reviewers. Quantitative and qualitative studies published in English exploring pedagogical approaches and/or educational techniques, strategies, teaching tools to reduce the influence of bias in health clinicians' decision making were sought to be included in this review. Results are presented numerically and thematically in a table accompanied by a narrative summary. RESULTS: Of the 732 articles identified, 13 met the aim of this study. Most publications originated from the United States (n=9). Educational practice in medicine accounted for most studies (n=8), followed by nursing and midwifery (n=2). A guiding philosophy or conceptual framework for content development was not indicated in most papers. Educational content was mainly provided via face-to-face (lecture/tutorial) delivery (n=10). Reflection was the most common strategy used for assessment of learning (n=6). Cognitive biases were mainly taught in a single session (n=5); implicit biases were taught via a mix of single (n=4) and multiple sessions (n=4). CONCLUSIONS: A range of pedagogical strategies were employed; most commonly, these were face-to-face, class-based activities such as lectures and tutorials. Assessments of student learning were primarily based on tests and personal reflection. There was limited use of real-world settings to educate students about or build skills in biases and their mitigation. There may be a valuable opportunity in exploring approaches to building these skills in the real-world settings that will be the workplaces of our future healthcare workers.