Competencies for Those Who Coach Physicians: A Modified Delphi Study.

The rapidly evolving coaching profession has permeated the health care industry and is gaining ground as a viable solution for addressing physician burnout, turnover, and leadership crises that plague the industry. Although various coach credentialing bodies are established, the profession has no standardized competencies for physician coaching as a specialty practice area, creating a market of aspiring coaches with varying degrees of expertise. To address this gap, we employed a modified Delphi approach to arrive at expert consensus on competencies necessary for coaching physicians and physician leaders. Informed by the National Board of Medical Examiners' practice of rapid blueprinting, a group of 11 expert physician coaches generated an initial list of key thematic areas and specific competencies within them. The competency document was then distributed for agreement rating and comment to over 100 stakeholders involved in physician coaching. Our consensus threshold was defined at 70% agreement, and actual responses ranged from 80.5% to 95.6% agreement. Comments were discussed and addressed by 3 members of the original group, resulting in a final model of 129 specific competencies in the following areas: (1) physician-specific coaching, (2) understanding physician and health care context, culture, and career span, (3) coaching theory and science, (4) diversity, equity, inclusion, and other social dynamics, (5) well-being and burnout, and (6) physician leadership. This consensus on physician coaching competencies represents a critical step toward establishing standards that inform coach education, training, and certification programs, as well as guide the selection of coaches and evaluation of coaching in health care settings.

Competency-Based Medical Education in a Norm-Referenced World: A Root Cause Analysis of Challenges to the Competency-Based Paradigm in Medical School.

Competency-based medical education (CBME) requires a criterion-referenced approach to assessment. However, despite best efforts to advance CBME, there remains an implicit, and at times, explicit, demand for norm-referencing, particularly at the junction of undergraduate medical education (UME) and graduate medical education (GME). In this manuscript, the authors perform a root cause analysis to determine the underlying reasons for continued norm-referencing in the context of the movement toward CBME. The root cause analysis consisted of 2 processes: (1) identification of potential causes and effects organized into a fishbone diagram and (2) identification of the 5 whys. The fishbone diagram identified 2 primary drivers: the false notion that measures such as grades are truly objective and the importance of different incentives for different key constituents. From these drivers, the importance of norm-referencing for residency selection was identified as a critical component. Exploration of the 5 whys further detailed the reasons for continuation of norm-referenced grading to facilitate selection, including the need for efficient screening in residency selection, dependence upon rank-order lists, perception that there is a best outcome to the match, lack of trust between residency programs and medical schools, and inadequate resources to support progression of trainees. Based on these findings, the authors argue that the implied purpose of assessment in UME is primarily stratification for residency selection. Because stratification requires comparison, a norm-referenced approach is needed. To advance CBME, the authors recommend reconsideration of the approach to assessment in UME to maintain the purpose of selection while also advancing the purpose of rendering a competency decision. Changing the approach will require a collaboration between national organizations, accrediting bodies, GME programs, UME programs, students, and patients/societies. Details are provided regarding the specific approaches required of each key constituent group.

A mixed methods exploration of the emergence of goal orientation in medical students' individualized learning plans.

PURPOSE: Goal orientation (GO) describes an individual's approach to different achievement situations. Understanding the motivations and approach to achieving goals of medical students is vital with the increasing emphasis on self-directed learning. The purpose of this study was to identify themes in self-improvement reflections that relate to each GO dimension (learning, performance-prove, and performance-avoid). METHODS: A sequential explanatory mixed methods design was used. GO data was used to categorize students into groups aligning with the GO dimension identified in the previous stage of quantitative analysis. Individualized learning plans (ILPs) for each GO dimension group were coded inductively to identify emergent themes related to goal setting and achievement. RESULTS: The learning GO group was the largest of the three GOs. Five themes were identified from inductive analysis: importance of practice, identifying elements that helped, identifying structural barriers, opportunities for improvement, and acknowledging experience. While these themes occur across GO, patterns exist within their ILPs based on GO. CONCLUSIONS: We identified common themes for motivations of medical students, and these motivations might differ depending on their GO. Further exploration into the themes over the course of their training will provide additional insights on what factors may be involved in student motivations towards learning and achievement. Educators can use this information to individualize feedback and students can better understand their motivations towards achieving goals.

Coaching models, theories, and structures: An overview for teaching faculty in the emergency department and educators in the offices.

Coaching is rapidly advancing in medical education as a relational process of facilitating sustainable change and growth. Coaching can support learners in emergency medicine at any stage by improving self-reflection, motivation, psychological capital, and goal creation and attainment. Different from the traditional models of advising and mentoring, coaching may be a new model for many educators. An introduction to key coaching concepts and ways they may be implemented in emergency medicine is provided. Experienced coaches employ a diverse array of models and techniques that may be new to novice coaches. This article summarizes a variety of coaching models, theories, and content areas that can be adapted to a coachee's needs and the situational context-be it the fast-paced emergency department or the faculty member's office.

Leveling the field: Development of reliable scoring rubrics for quantitative and qualitative medical education research abstracts.

BACKGROUND: Research abstracts are submitted for presentation at scientific conferences; however, criteria for judging abstracts are variable. We sought to develop two rigorous abstract scoring rubrics for education research submissions reporting (1) quantitative data and (2) qualitative data and then to collect validity evidence to support score interpretation. METHODS: We used a modified Delphi method to achieve expert consensus for scoring rubric items to optimize content validity. Eight education research experts participated in two separate modified Delphi processes, one to generate quantitative research items and one for qualitative. Modifications were made between rounds based on item scores and expert feedback. Homogeneity of ratings in the Delphi process was calculated using Cronbach's alpha, with increasing homogeneity considered an indication of consensus. Rubrics were piloted by scoring abstracts from 22 quantitative publications from AEM Education and Training "Critical Appraisal of Emergency Medicine Education Research" (11 highlighted for excellent methodology and 11 that were not) and 10 qualitative publications (five highlighted for excellent methodology and five that were not). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates of reliability were calculated. RESULTS: Each rubric required three rounds of a modified Delphi process. The resulting quantitative rubric contained nine items: quality of objectives, appropriateness of methods, outcomes, data analysis, generalizability, importance to medical education, innovation, quality of writing, and strength of conclusions (Cronbach's α for the third round = 0.922, ICC for total scores during piloting = 0.893). The resulting qualitative rubric contained seven items: quality of study aims, general methods, data collection, sampling, data analysis, writing quality, and strength of conclusions (Cronbach's α for the third round = 0.913, ICC for the total scores during piloting = 0.788). CONCLUSION: We developed scoring rubrics to assess quality in quantitative and qualitative medical education research abstracts to aid in selection for presentation at scientific meetings. Our tools demonstrated high reliability.

Beyond advising and mentoring: Competencies for coaching in medical education.

BACKGROUND: Coaching supports academic goals, professional development and wellbeing in medical education. Scant literature exists on training and assessing coaches and evaluating coaching programs. To begin filling this gap, we created a set of coach competencies for medical education using a modified Delphi approach. METHODS: An expert team assembled, comprised of seven experts in the field of coaching. A modified Delphi approach was utilized to develop competencies. RESULTS: Fifteen competencies in five domains resulted: coaching process and structure, relational skills, coaching skills, coaching theories and models, and coach development. CONCLUSION: These competencies delineate essential features of a coach in medical education. Next steps include creating faculty development and assessment tools for coaching.

What is the association between student well-being and high-stakes examination scores?

INTRODUCTION: As educators seek to improve medical student well-being, it is essential to understand the interplay between distress and important outcomes. Performance on Step 1 of the United States Medical Licensing Examination has played a significant role in selection for postgraduate residency positions in the United States and consequently has been a source of great stress for medical students. The purpose of this study was to examine whether student well-being correlates with performance on a high stakes licensing examination. METHODS: Between 2014 and 2016, three sequential cohorts of medical students at the University of Michigan Medical School completed the Medical Student Well-Being Index (MSWBI) at the end of their 2nd-year curriculum, shortly before taking Step 1. Associations between well-being and Step 1 scores were investigated while adjusting for MCAT scores and cumulative second-year course scores. RESULTS: In total, 354 students were included in the analysis (68.1% of potential responders). On bivariate analysis, poor student well-being (0 = low distress [high well-being], 7 = high distress [poor well-being]) was associated with lower Step 1 examination scores (slope = -2.10, P < .01), and well-being accounted for 5% of overall Step 1 score variability (R2  = .05). However, after adjustment for MCAT scores and cumulative GPA (full model R2  = .51), the relationship between well-being and Step 1 score was no longer significant (slope = -0.70, P-value = .06). CONCLUSIONS: When controlling for metrics of academic performance, student well-being prior to taking Step 1 was not associated with how well students performed on Step 1 for the study sample.

The AAMC Standardized Video Interview: Lessons Learned From the Residency Selection Process.

Calls to change the residency selection process have increased in recent years, with many focusing on the need for holistic review and alternatives to academic metrics. One aspect of applicant performance to consider in holistic review is proficiency in behavioral competencies. The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) developed the AAMC Standardized Video Interview (SVI), an online, asynchronous video interview that assesses applicants' knowledge of professionalism and their interpersonal and communication skills. The AAMC worked with the emergency medicine community to pilot the SVI. Data from 4 years of research (Electronic Residency Application Service [ERAS] 2017-2020 cycles) show the SVI is a reliable, valid assessment of these behavioral competencies. It provides information not available in the ERAS application packet, and it does not disadvantage individuals or groups. Yet despite the SVI's psychometric properties, the AAMC elected not to renew or expand the pilot in residency selection.In this Invited Commentary, the authors share lessons learned from the AAMC SVI project about introducing a new tool for use in residency selection. They recommend that future projects endeavoring to find ways to support holistic review engage all stakeholders from the start; communicate the value of the new tool early and often; make direct comparisons with existing tools; give new tools time and space to succeed; strike a balance between early adopters and broad participation; help stakeholders understand the limitations of what a tool can do; and set clear expectations about both stakeholder input and pricing. They encourage the medical education community to learn from the SVI project and to consider future partnerships with the AAMC or other specialty organizations to develop new tools and approaches that prioritize the community's needs. Finding solutions to the challenges facing residency selection should be a priority for all stakeholders.