Medical students value advocacy and health policy training in undergraduate medical education: A mixed methods study.

IF 2.1 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science Pub Date : 2025-02-28 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1017/cts.2025.35
Caroline Minnick, Kevin Alexander Soltany, Sudarshan Krishnamurthy, Maeve Murray, Roy Strowd, Kimberly Montez
{"title":"Medical students value advocacy and health policy training in undergraduate medical education: A mixed methods study.","authors":"Caroline Minnick, Kevin Alexander Soltany, Sudarshan Krishnamurthy, Maeve Murray, Roy Strowd, Kimberly Montez","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.35","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study aimed to describe medical students' perceptions and experiences with health policy and advocacy training and practice and define motivations and barriers for engagement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a mixed-methods study of medical students from May to October 2022. Students were invited to participate in a web-based survey and optional follow-up phone interview. Surveys were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Phone interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and de-identified. Interviews were coded inductively using a coding dictionary. Themes were identified using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>35/580 survey responses (6% response rate) and 15 interviews were completed. 100% rated social factors as related to overall health. 65.7% of participants felt \"very confident\" or \"extremely confident\" in identifying social needs but only 11.4% felt \"very confident\" in addressing these needs. From interviews, six themes were identified: (1) participants recognized that involvement in health policy and/or advocacy is a duty of physicians; (2) participants acknowledged physicians' voices as well respected; (3) participants were comfortable identifying social determinants of health but felt unprepared to address needs; (4) barriers to future involvement included intimidation, self-doubt, and skepticism of impact; (5) past exposures and awareness of advocacy topics motivated participants to engage in health policy and/or advocacy during medical school; and (6) participants identified areas where the training on these topics excelled and offered recommendations for improvement, including simulation, earlier integration, and teaching on health-related laws and policies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study highlights the importance of involvement in health policy and advocacy among medical students and the need for enhanced education and exposure.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e61"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975784/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.35","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to describe medical students' perceptions and experiences with health policy and advocacy training and practice and define motivations and barriers for engagement.

Methods: This was a mixed-methods study of medical students from May to October 2022. Students were invited to participate in a web-based survey and optional follow-up phone interview. Surveys were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Phone interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and de-identified. Interviews were coded inductively using a coding dictionary. Themes were identified using thematic analysis.

Results: 35/580 survey responses (6% response rate) and 15 interviews were completed. 100% rated social factors as related to overall health. 65.7% of participants felt "very confident" or "extremely confident" in identifying social needs but only 11.4% felt "very confident" in addressing these needs. From interviews, six themes were identified: (1) participants recognized that involvement in health policy and/or advocacy is a duty of physicians; (2) participants acknowledged physicians' voices as well respected; (3) participants were comfortable identifying social determinants of health but felt unprepared to address needs; (4) barriers to future involvement included intimidation, self-doubt, and skepticism of impact; (5) past exposures and awareness of advocacy topics motivated participants to engage in health policy and/or advocacy during medical school; and (6) participants identified areas where the training on these topics excelled and offered recommendations for improvement, including simulation, earlier integration, and teaching on health-related laws and policies.

Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of involvement in health policy and advocacy among medical students and the need for enhanced education and exposure.

在本科医学教育中,医学生重视倡导和卫生政策培训:一项混合方法研究。
本研究旨在描述医学生对卫生政策和宣传培训和实践的看法和经验,并确定参与的动机和障碍。方法:采用混合方法对2022年5月至10月的医学生进行研究。学生被邀请参加网络调查和可选的后续电话访谈。调查采用描述性统计进行分析。电话采访被录音、转录并去识别。访谈用编码字典进行归纳编码。使用主题分析确定主题。结果:共完成问卷调查35/580份,回复率6%,访谈15次。100%认为社会因素与整体健康有关。65.7%的参与者对识别社会需求感到“非常有信心”或“非常有信心”,但只有11.4%的参与者对解决这些需求感到“非常有信心”。从访谈中确定了六个主题:(1)与会者认识到参与卫生政策和/或宣传是医生的职责;(2)参与者认为医生的声音受到尊重;(3)参与者能够轻松确定健康的社会决定因素,但对解决需求感到措手不及;(4)未来参与的障碍包括恐吓、自我怀疑和对影响的怀疑;(5)过去对宣传主题的接触和认识促使参与者在医学院期间参与卫生政策和/或宣传;(6)与会者确定了关于这些主题的培训较为出色的领域,并提出了改进建议,包括模拟、早期整合以及与健康有关的法律和政策的教学。结论:本研究强调了医学生参与卫生政策和宣传的重要性,以及加强教育和接触的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
26.90%
发文量
437
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信