Teaching to Teach: A Scoping Review of Teaching Skill-Development Programs across Medical Education.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Alicia Darwin, Ashley Mason, Alyssa Faye Clare, Sarah Nestler, Antoinette Spoto-Cannons
{"title":"Teaching to Teach: A Scoping Review of Teaching Skill-Development Programs across Medical Education.","authors":"Alicia Darwin, Ashley Mason, Alyssa Faye Clare, Sarah Nestler, Antoinette Spoto-Cannons","doi":"10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Teaching is an integral part of the day-to-day responsibilities of physicians and physicians-in-training. We provide an overview across the medical education continuum of who is being trained how to teach, the methods of delivery used, and the effectiveness of the program in improving teacher confidence and teaching skills to improve the execution of teaching training programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In October 2020, the authors conducted a scoping review, systematically searching six databases (PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Web of Science) for literature dating back to 2010 describing interventions aimed at teaching physicians or physicians-in-training how to teach effectively. Four authors screened the articles for inclusion based on title and key words. Four authors reviewed all of the articles selected to identify key features, including manuscript citation, study design, study institution, demographic information, course description, and efficacy, and entered the data into a Qualtrics survey. Two authors then analyzed the data extracted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 23,409 potentially eligible studies, 163 were included. The populations studied included medical students (17%), residents (55%), fellows (13%), faculty/attendings (23%), and other (4%). The length of the training interventions ranged from half a day or less to longer than 1 year. Multiple instructional methods were used including lecture (71), observed teaching in action (71), case-based learning (34), learner feedback (24), modules (25), objective structured teaching exercises (19), essays/writing assignments (11), portfolio and/or personal teaching philosophy development (5), and tests/examinations (4). Evaluation methods varied, and efficacy was measured by an improvement in confidence in teaching abilities (61), in self-reported teaching abilities (59), objective structured teaching exercises scores (3), and an increased interest in academic medicine (33).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Current programs designed to teach medical students, residents, and physicians how to teach vary widely. We propose that future research is needed to advance the instruction of physicians and physicians-in-training on how to be effective clinical educators.</p>","PeriodicalId":22043,"journal":{"name":"Southern Medical Journal","volume":"118 5","pages":"260-266"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001828","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Teaching is an integral part of the day-to-day responsibilities of physicians and physicians-in-training. We provide an overview across the medical education continuum of who is being trained how to teach, the methods of delivery used, and the effectiveness of the program in improving teacher confidence and teaching skills to improve the execution of teaching training programs.

Methods: In October 2020, the authors conducted a scoping review, systematically searching six databases (PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Web of Science) for literature dating back to 2010 describing interventions aimed at teaching physicians or physicians-in-training how to teach effectively. Four authors screened the articles for inclusion based on title and key words. Four authors reviewed all of the articles selected to identify key features, including manuscript citation, study design, study institution, demographic information, course description, and efficacy, and entered the data into a Qualtrics survey. Two authors then analyzed the data extracted.

Results: Of 23,409 potentially eligible studies, 163 were included. The populations studied included medical students (17%), residents (55%), fellows (13%), faculty/attendings (23%), and other (4%). The length of the training interventions ranged from half a day or less to longer than 1 year. Multiple instructional methods were used including lecture (71), observed teaching in action (71), case-based learning (34), learner feedback (24), modules (25), objective structured teaching exercises (19), essays/writing assignments (11), portfolio and/or personal teaching philosophy development (5), and tests/examinations (4). Evaluation methods varied, and efficacy was measured by an improvement in confidence in teaching abilities (61), in self-reported teaching abilities (59), objective structured teaching exercises scores (3), and an increased interest in academic medicine (33).

Conclusions: Current programs designed to teach medical students, residents, and physicians how to teach vary widely. We propose that future research is needed to advance the instruction of physicians and physicians-in-training on how to be effective clinical educators.

从教学到教学:医学教育中教学技能发展计划的范围审查。
目的:教学是医师和实习医师日常职责的一个组成部分。我们概述了整个医学教育的连续性,包括接受培训的人员如何教学,使用的交付方法,以及提高教师信心和教学技能的有效性,以提高教学培训计划的执行力。方法:2020年10月,作者进行了一项范围综述,系统地检索了六个数据库(PubMed、Embase、MEDLINE、Cochrane、护理和联合健康文献累积索引和Web of Science),以获取可追溯到2010年的文献,这些文献描述了旨在教授医生或在职医生如何有效教学的干预措施。四位作者根据标题和关键词对文章进行筛选。四名作者回顾了所有选定的文章,以确定关键特征,包括手稿引用、研究设计、研究机构、人口统计信息、课程描述和疗效,并将数据输入Qualtrics调查。两位作者随后分析了提取的数据。结果:在23409项可能符合条件的研究中,纳入了163项。研究人群包括医学生(17%)、住院医生(55%)、研究员(13%)、教师/主治医生(23%)和其他(4%)。培训干预的时间从半天或更短到1年以上不等。采用了多种教学方法,包括讲座(71)、观察式教学(71)、基于案例的学习(34)、学习者反馈(24)、模块(25)、客观结构化教学练习(19)、论文/写作作业(11)、作品集和/或个人教学理念发展(5)以及测试/考试(4)。评估方法各不相同,有效性是通过对教学能力信心的提高(61)、自我报告的教学能力(59)、客观结构化教学练习得分(3)和对学术医学兴趣的增加(33)来衡量的。结论:目前设计用于教授医学生、住院医师和医生如何教学的方案差异很大。我们建议,未来的研究需要推进指导医师和在培训医师如何成为有效的临床教育者。
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
Southern Medical Journal
Southern Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
222
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: As the official journal of the Birmingham, Alabama-based Southern Medical Association (SMA), the Southern Medical Journal (SMJ) has for more than 100 years provided the latest clinical information in areas that affect patients'' daily lives. Now delivered to individuals exclusively online, the SMJ has a multidisciplinary focus that covers a broad range of topics relevant to physicians and other healthcare specialists in all relevant aspects of the profession, including medicine and medical specialties, surgery and surgery specialties; child and maternal health; mental health; emergency and disaster medicine; public health and environmental medicine; bioethics and medical education; and quality health care, patient safety, and best practices. Each month, articles span the spectrum of medical topics, providing timely, up-to-the-minute information for both primary care physicians and specialists. Contributors include leaders in the healthcare field from across the country and around the world. The SMJ enables physicians to provide the best possible care to patients in this age of rapidly changing modern medicine.
×
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