What Is Taught Versus What Is Learned: Health Advocacy in Specialist Graduate Medical Education.

IF 5.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Yvonne Ying, Maria Athina Tina Martimianakis, Brett Schrewe
{"title":"What Is Taught Versus What Is Learned: Health Advocacy in Specialist Graduate Medical Education.","authors":"Yvonne Ying, Maria Athina Tina Martimianakis, Brett Schrewe","doi":"10.1097/ACM.0000000000006074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Health advocacy (HA) is a key component of competency frameworks in many global jurisdictions, yet how HA is taught is not well defined, particularly in specialty graduate medical education. This study explored how residents in these programs came to understand what HA is, what activities it entails, and what importance it carries.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This qualitative study conducted semistructured interviews of 39 specialty residents from 2 universities (University of Toronto and University of Ottawa) from July 2019 to June 2023. A reflexive thematic analysis was used, with sensitizing concepts of the formal, informal, and hidden curricula and the CanMEDS health advocate role to construct themes from this data set.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most trainees struggled to define what HA means, what good HA should look like, and which kinds of activities it signifies. The lack of definitional clarity meant that many non-HA activities became conflated with HA, particularly research and quality improvement. Few could recall clear formal curricular content, whereas exposure in clinical training environments was highly variable. Many perceived HA activities as threats to clinical efficiency, of little interest to residency program leadership, and of minimal currency in being competitive for eventual staff positions. Self-identified advocates frequently engaged in self-censoring behaviors because they thought their programs and leaders were often not supportive of this kind of work.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Trainees struggled to understand what activities comprise HA because it was not prioritized in their programs or they encountered highly variable role modeling. Trainees who participated in HA activities experienced difficulties integrating HA into their overall clinical skill set due to a lack of institutional support. Health advocacy training requires consideration of structural and cultural reinforcements, including the adoption of curricula that integrate it with daily clinical care and address hidden curriculum effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":50929,"journal":{"name":"Academic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000006074","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Health advocacy (HA) is a key component of competency frameworks in many global jurisdictions, yet how HA is taught is not well defined, particularly in specialty graduate medical education. This study explored how residents in these programs came to understand what HA is, what activities it entails, and what importance it carries.

Method: This qualitative study conducted semistructured interviews of 39 specialty residents from 2 universities (University of Toronto and University of Ottawa) from July 2019 to June 2023. A reflexive thematic analysis was used, with sensitizing concepts of the formal, informal, and hidden curricula and the CanMEDS health advocate role to construct themes from this data set.

Results: Most trainees struggled to define what HA means, what good HA should look like, and which kinds of activities it signifies. The lack of definitional clarity meant that many non-HA activities became conflated with HA, particularly research and quality improvement. Few could recall clear formal curricular content, whereas exposure in clinical training environments was highly variable. Many perceived HA activities as threats to clinical efficiency, of little interest to residency program leadership, and of minimal currency in being competitive for eventual staff positions. Self-identified advocates frequently engaged in self-censoring behaviors because they thought their programs and leaders were often not supportive of this kind of work.

Conclusions: Trainees struggled to understand what activities comprise HA because it was not prioritized in their programs or they encountered highly variable role modeling. Trainees who participated in HA activities experienced difficulties integrating HA into their overall clinical skill set due to a lack of institutional support. Health advocacy training requires consideration of structural and cultural reinforcements, including the adoption of curricula that integrate it with daily clinical care and address hidden curriculum effects.

教什么与学什么:专科研究生医学教育中的健康倡导。
目的:健康宣传(HA)是全球许多司法管辖区能力框架的关键组成部分,但如何教授健康宣传尚未得到很好的定义,特别是在专业研究生医学教育中。本研究探讨了这些项目中的居民如何理解医管局是什么,它需要哪些活动,以及它的重要性。方法:本定性研究于2019年7月至2023年6月对2所大学(多伦多大学和渥太华大学)的39名专业住院医师进行半结构化访谈。利用正式、非正式和隐藏课程的敏感概念以及CanMEDS健康倡导角色,使用反身性主题分析从该数据集构建主题。结果:大多数受训者都难以定义健康护理的含义,良好的健康护理应该是什么样子,以及它所代表的活动类型。缺乏明确的定义意味着许多非医管局活动与医管局合并,特别是研究和质量改进。很少有人能回忆起清晰的正式课程内容,而在临床培训环境中的暴露是高度可变的。许多人认为医管局的活动对临床效率构成威胁,对住院医师项目的领导没有什么兴趣,在最终的员工职位竞争中也没有什么价值。自我认同的倡导者经常采取自我审查的行为,因为他们认为他们的项目和领导通常不支持这种工作。结论:受训者很难理解哪些活动构成了HA,因为它在他们的项目中没有被优先考虑,或者他们遇到了高度可变的角色建模。由于缺乏机构支持,参加医管局活动的学员难以将医管局融入他们的整体临床技能。保健宣传培训需要考虑加强结构和文化,包括采用将其与日常临床护理结合起来的课程,并解决隐藏的课程效果。
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
Academic Medicine
Academic Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
982
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, acts as an international forum for exchanging ideas, information, and strategies to address the significant challenges in academic medicine. The journal covers areas such as research, education, clinical care, community collaboration, and leadership, with a commitment to serving the public interest.
×
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