Perceptions of Healthcare Design Course Implementation and Opportunities from a Student-Driven Multidisciplinary Collaboration.

Daniel Hu, Mary Lou, Akash Nadella, Mohnish Nadella, Geoff Capraro
{"title":"Perceptions of Healthcare Design Course Implementation and Opportunities from a Student-Driven Multidisciplinary Collaboration.","authors":"Daniel Hu, Mary Lou, Akash Nadella, Mohnish Nadella, Geoff Capraro","doi":"10.30476/jamp.2025.108162.2239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Design thinking is vital in medical education for addressing complex healthcare challenges, but interdisciplinary collaboration opportunities remain limited. This study evaluates student-reported 1) exposure to design-thinking methods, and 2) access to healthcare-specific design opportunities (courses, projects, mentors, and networks) at Brown University, the Rhode Island School of Design (RISD), and the Warren Alpert Medical School (AMS). It also assesses a student-driven organization that fosters skill development, interdisciplinary collaboration, and project-based learning.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was developed with multidisciplinary student and faculty review for face and content validity. Using a cross-sectional convenience sample from a cross-institutional listserv, 77 students completed the 25-question survey covering demographics, prior experiences, interests, and perceived access to healthcare design opportunities. Responses used checkbox and Likert scale formats. We used descriptive statistics and between-group comparisons (project participants vs nonparticipants) via t-tests on Likert means (α=0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey yielded 77 responses. Respondents represented Brown (61%), AMS (18%), and RISD (14%), with 6% enrolled in joint Brown-RISD programs. Institutional disparities were noted from self-reported aptitudes: RISD students excelled in design (100%), and AMS in research (79%). Brown students reported the greatest access to academic opportunities in healthcare design (68%). Common challenges included limited professional networks (average 2.4/5). Participants sought collaborations and skills from other institutions. Most respondents (94%) desired project-based opportunities, highlighting demand for practical applications. Design x Health project participants reported significantly higher self-perceived access to opportunities and understanding of design processes compared to non-participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study highlights the potential of student-driven organizations in addressing limited opportunities and networking needed to incorporate design in health solutions. By improving access to networks and integrating healthcare design into curricular and extracurricular offerings, such initiatives prepare students to tackle healthcare challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":30645,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advances in Medical Education and Professionalism","volume":"14 1","pages":"32-42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12858437/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advances in Medical Education and Professionalism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30476/jamp.2025.108162.2239","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Design thinking is vital in medical education for addressing complex healthcare challenges, but interdisciplinary collaboration opportunities remain limited. This study evaluates student-reported 1) exposure to design-thinking methods, and 2) access to healthcare-specific design opportunities (courses, projects, mentors, and networks) at Brown University, the Rhode Island School of Design (RISD), and the Warren Alpert Medical School (AMS). It also assesses a student-driven organization that fosters skill development, interdisciplinary collaboration, and project-based learning.

Methods: A survey was developed with multidisciplinary student and faculty review for face and content validity. Using a cross-sectional convenience sample from a cross-institutional listserv, 77 students completed the 25-question survey covering demographics, prior experiences, interests, and perceived access to healthcare design opportunities. Responses used checkbox and Likert scale formats. We used descriptive statistics and between-group comparisons (project participants vs nonparticipants) via t-tests on Likert means (α=0.05).

Results: The survey yielded 77 responses. Respondents represented Brown (61%), AMS (18%), and RISD (14%), with 6% enrolled in joint Brown-RISD programs. Institutional disparities were noted from self-reported aptitudes: RISD students excelled in design (100%), and AMS in research (79%). Brown students reported the greatest access to academic opportunities in healthcare design (68%). Common challenges included limited professional networks (average 2.4/5). Participants sought collaborations and skills from other institutions. Most respondents (94%) desired project-based opportunities, highlighting demand for practical applications. Design x Health project participants reported significantly higher self-perceived access to opportunities and understanding of design processes compared to non-participants.

Conclusions: This study highlights the potential of student-driven organizations in addressing limited opportunities and networking needed to incorporate design in health solutions. By improving access to networks and integrating healthcare design into curricular and extracurricular offerings, such initiatives prepare students to tackle healthcare challenges.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

医疗保健设计课程实施的感知和学生驱动的多学科合作的机会。
简介:设计思维在解决复杂医疗挑战的医学教育中至关重要,但跨学科合作的机会仍然有限。本研究评估了布朗大学、罗德岛设计学院(RISD)和沃伦·阿尔珀特医学院(AMS)学生报告的1)接触设计思维方法的情况,以及2)获得医疗保健特定设计机会(课程、项目、导师和网络)的情况。它还评估了一个以学生为导向的组织,该组织促进了技能发展、跨学科合作和基于项目的学习。方法:采用多学科的学生和教师评价方法对面孔效度和内容效度进行调查。使用来自跨机构listserv的横断面方便样本,77名学生完成了25个问题的调查,涵盖人口统计、先前经验、兴趣和对医疗保健设计机会的感知。回答采用复选框和李克特量表格式。我们使用描述性统计和组间比较(项目参与者与非参与者),通过李克特均值的t检验(α=0.05)。结果:本次调查共收到77份回复。受访者分别代表布朗大学(61%)、AMS大学(18%)和罗德岛设计学院(14%),其中6%的人参加了布朗大学和罗德岛设计学院的联合项目。从自我报告的能力中可以看出制度差异:罗德岛设计学院的学生在设计方面表现出色(100%),而AMS在研究方面表现出色(79%)。布朗大学的学生在医疗保健设计方面获得的学术机会最多(68%)。常见的挑战包括有限的专业网络(平均2.4/5)。参与者寻求其他机构的合作和技能。大多数受访者(94%)希望获得基于项目的机会,突出了对实际应用的需求。与非参与者相比,设计x健康项目参与者报告了更高的自我感知机会和对设计过程的理解。结论:本研究强调了学生驱动组织在解决将设计纳入健康解决方案所需的有限机会和网络方面的潜力。通过改善网络访问并将医疗保健设计整合到课程和课外活动中,这些举措为学生应对医疗保健挑战做好了准备。
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 Advances in Medical Education and Professionalism
Journal of Advances in Medical Education and Professionalism Health Professions-Health Professions (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书