磨损:儿科工作场所评估不公平的现象学研究

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Hannah L. Kakara Anderson , Layla Abdulla , Pricilla Cabral , Marjan Govaerts , Dorene F. Balmer , Jamiu O. Busari
{"title":"磨损:儿科工作场所评估不公平的现象学研究","authors":"Hannah L. Kakara Anderson ,&nbsp;Layla Abdulla ,&nbsp;Pricilla Cabral ,&nbsp;Marjan Govaerts ,&nbsp;Dorene F. Balmer ,&nbsp;Jamiu O. Busari","doi":"10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite the centrality of workplace-based assessments in medical education and practice, there is troubling evidence that workplace-based assessments are inequitable. This study investigated the experience of inequity in workplace-based assessment via a phenomenological study with learners (resident physicians) and assessors (physician supervisors) in one specialty in the United States, general pediatrics, from August 2023-June 2024. The authors used critical phenomenology to prompt and iteratively analyze participants' experiences with inequity in workplace-based assessment and their lifeworlds. To understand participants' lifeworlds, the authors applied Collins' domains of power framework to examine participants’ varied and unique locations within intersecting power relations. Participants described the phenomenon of inequity in workplace-based assessment as a type of abrasion, that is, an injury caused by friction that occurred when a workplace-based assessment excoriated their sense of self. Abrasion had three dimensions: physical, affective, and temporal. These findings suggest that inequity in workplace-based assessment cannot be tracked solely by measuring disparities in numbers, grades, differences in narrative language used in comments, and other common measures of inequity, rather, it can be characterized as an experienced, felt, phenomenon that has essential dimensions. These findings have major implications for how inequity is conceptualized and intervened upon in medical education.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49122,"journal":{"name":"Social Science & Medicine","volume":"375 ","pages":"Article 118092"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abrasion: a phenomenological study of inequity in workplace-based assessment in pediatrics\",\"authors\":\"Hannah L. Kakara Anderson ,&nbsp;Layla Abdulla ,&nbsp;Pricilla Cabral ,&nbsp;Marjan Govaerts ,&nbsp;Dorene F. Balmer ,&nbsp;Jamiu O. Busari\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118092\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Despite the centrality of workplace-based assessments in medical education and practice, there is troubling evidence that workplace-based assessments are inequitable. This study investigated the experience of inequity in workplace-based assessment via a phenomenological study with learners (resident physicians) and assessors (physician supervisors) in one specialty in the United States, general pediatrics, from August 2023-June 2024. The authors used critical phenomenology to prompt and iteratively analyze participants' experiences with inequity in workplace-based assessment and their lifeworlds. To understand participants' lifeworlds, the authors applied Collins' domains of power framework to examine participants’ varied and unique locations within intersecting power relations. Participants described the phenomenon of inequity in workplace-based assessment as a type of abrasion, that is, an injury caused by friction that occurred when a workplace-based assessment excoriated their sense of self. Abrasion had three dimensions: physical, affective, and temporal. These findings suggest that inequity in workplace-based assessment cannot be tracked solely by measuring disparities in numbers, grades, differences in narrative language used in comments, and other common measures of inequity, rather, it can be characterized as an experienced, felt, phenomenon that has essential dimensions. These findings have major implications for how inequity is conceptualized and intervened upon in medical education.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49122,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Science & Medicine\",\"volume\":\"375 \",\"pages\":\"Article 118092\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Science & Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625004228\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625004228","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管基于工作场所的评估在医学教育和实践中处于中心地位,但有令人不安的证据表明,基于工作场所的评估是不公平的。本研究从2023年8月至2024年6月,通过对美国普通儿科一个专业的学习者(住院医师)和评估者(医师主管)进行现象学研究,调查了基于工作场所的评估中的不公平体验。作者使用批判现象学来提示和迭代分析参与者在基于工作场所的评估和他们的生活世界中的不平等经历。为了理解参与者的生活世界,作者运用柯林斯的权力框架域来考察参与者在交叉权力关系中的不同和独特的位置。参与者将基于工作场所的评估中的不公平现象描述为一种磨损,也就是说,当基于工作场所的评估对他们的自我意识进行了严厉的批评时,这种摩擦造成了伤害。磨损有三个维度:生理、情感和时间。这些发现表明,基于工作场所的评估中的不平等不能仅仅通过衡量数字、等级、评论中使用的叙事语言的差异和其他常见的不平等措施来追踪,相反,它可以被描述为一种具有基本维度的经验、感觉和现象。这些发现对如何将不平等概念化并干预医学教育具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Abrasion: a phenomenological study of inequity in workplace-based assessment in pediatrics
Despite the centrality of workplace-based assessments in medical education and practice, there is troubling evidence that workplace-based assessments are inequitable. This study investigated the experience of inequity in workplace-based assessment via a phenomenological study with learners (resident physicians) and assessors (physician supervisors) in one specialty in the United States, general pediatrics, from August 2023-June 2024. The authors used critical phenomenology to prompt and iteratively analyze participants' experiences with inequity in workplace-based assessment and their lifeworlds. To understand participants' lifeworlds, the authors applied Collins' domains of power framework to examine participants’ varied and unique locations within intersecting power relations. Participants described the phenomenon of inequity in workplace-based assessment as a type of abrasion, that is, an injury caused by friction that occurred when a workplace-based assessment excoriated their sense of self. Abrasion had three dimensions: physical, affective, and temporal. These findings suggest that inequity in workplace-based assessment cannot be tracked solely by measuring disparities in numbers, grades, differences in narrative language used in comments, and other common measures of inequity, rather, it can be characterized as an experienced, felt, phenomenon that has essential dimensions. These findings have major implications for how inequity is conceptualized and intervened upon in medical education.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Science & Medicine
Social Science & Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
762
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Social Science & Medicine provides an international and interdisciplinary forum for the dissemination of social science research on health. We publish original research articles (both empirical and theoretical), reviews, position papers and commentaries on health issues, to inform current research, policy and practice in all areas of common interest to social scientists, health practitioners, and policy makers. The journal publishes material relevant to any aspect of health from a wide range of social science disciplines (anthropology, economics, epidemiology, geography, policy, psychology, and sociology), and material relevant to the social sciences from any of the professions concerned with physical and mental health, health care, clinical practice, and health policy and organization. We encourage material which is of general interest to an international readership.
×
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