Ethics Education in Health Sciences Should Engage Contentious Social Issues: Here Is Why and How.

Teaching ethics is crucial to health sciences education. Doing it well requires a willingness to engage contentious social issues. Those issues introduce conflict and risk, but avoiding them ignores moral diversity and renders the work of ethics education irrelevant. Therefore, when (not if) contentious issues and moral differences arise, they must be acknowledged and can be addressed with humility, collegiality, and openness to support learning. Faculty must risk moments when not everyone will "feel safe," so the candor implied in psychological safety can emerge. The deliberative and social work of ethics education involves generous listening, wading into difference, and wondering together if our beliefs and arguments are as sound as we once thought. By forecasting the need for candid engagement with contentious issues and moral difference, establishing ground rules, and bolstering due process structures for faculty and students, a riskier and more relevant ethics pedagogy can emerge. Doing so will prepare everyone for the moral diversity they can expect in our common life and in practice.

In Search of Medical Professionalism Research: Preliminary Results from a Review of Widely Read Medical Journals.

INTRODUCTION: Professionalism is a core concept in medicine. The extent to which knowledge about professionalism is anchored in empirical research is unknown. Understanding the current state of research is necessary to identify significant gaps and create a road map for future professionalism efforts. The authors conducted an exploratory literature review to characterize professionalism research published in widely read medical journals, identify knowledge gaps, and describe the sources of funding for the identified studies. METHODS: The authors focused on Medline's Abridged Index Medicus and 4 core Medline education-oriented journal and developed a search filter using text words found in the article title or abstract addressing professionalism. Articles were further filtered to include those indicating a research focus. RESULTS: The search strategy resulted in 461 professionalism research articles for analysis. Articles were divided into themes of education (n = 212, 45.9%), performance (n = 83, 18%), measurement development (n = 13, 2.8%), remediation (n = 53, 11.5%), and well-being (n = 100, 21.6%). There were 36 studies from 1980 to 2002 (Era 1: before publication of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies) and 425 from 2003 to 17 (Era 2: after Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education publication of competencies). Professionalism education was the most common topic area, and most studies were from single institutions with results based on convenience samples. Most studies received no funding or were funded by the authors' own institution. DISCUSSION: Little empirical research is available on professionalism in widely read medical journals. There has been limited external research funding available to study this topic. CONCLUSION: More investment in high quality professionalism research is justified and should be encouraged.

Self vs. Other Focus: Predicting Professionalism Remediation of Emergency Medicine Residents.

INTRODUCTION: Unprofessionalism is a major reason for resident dismissal from training. Because of the high stakes involved, residents and educators alike would benefit from information predicting whether they might experience challenges related to this competency. Our objective was to correlate the outcome of professionalism-related remedial actions during residency with the predictor variable of resident response to a standardized interview question: "Why is Medicine important to you?" METHODS: We conducted a professional development quality improvement (QI) initiative to improve resident education and mentorship by achieving a better understanding of each resident's reasons for valuing a career in medicine. This initiative entailed an interview administered to each resident beginning emergency medicine training at San Antonio Military Medical Center during 2006-2013. The interviews uniformly began with the standardized question "Why is Medicine important to you?" The residency program director documented a free-text summary of each response to this question, the accuracy of which was confirmed by the resident. We analyzed the text of each resident's response after a review of the QI data suggested an association between responses and professionalism actions (retrospective cohort design). Two associate investigators blinded to all interview data, remedial actions, and resident identities categorized each text response as either self-focused (e.g., "I enjoy the challenge") or other-focused (e.g., "I enjoy helping patients"). Additional de-identified data collected included demographics, and expressed personal importance of politics and religion. The primary outcome was a Clinical Competency Committee professionalism remedial action. RESULTS: Of 114 physicians starting residency during 2006-2013, 106 (93.0%) completed the interview. There was good inter-rater reliability in associate investigator categorization of resident responses as either self-focused or other-focused (kappa coefficient 0.85). Thirteen of 50 residents (26.0%) expressed self-focus versus three of 54 (5.4%) residents expressed other-focus experienced professionalism remedial actions (p<0.01). This association held in a logistic regression model controlling for measured confounders (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Self-focused responses to the question "Why is Medicine important to you?" correlated with professionalism remedial actions during residency.

Doctor role modelling in medical education: BEME Guide No. 27.

AIM: The aim of this review is to summarise the evidence currently available on role modelling by doctors in medical education. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted (PubMed, Psyc- Info, Embase, Education Research Complete, Web of Knowledge, ERIC and British Education Index) from January 1990 to February 2012. Data extraction was completed by two independent reviewers and included a quality assessment of each paper. A thematic analysis was conducted on all the included papers. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for the review. Six main themes emerged from the content of high and medium quality papers: 1) the attributes of positive doctor role models; 2) the personality profiles of positive role models; 3) the influence of positive role models on students' career choice; 4) the process of positive role modelling; 5) the influence of negative role modelling; 6) the influence of culture, diversity and gender in the choice of role model. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights role modelling as an important process for the professional development of learners. Excellence in role modelling involves demonstration of high standards of clinical competence, excellence in clinical teaching skills and humanistic personal qualities. Positive role models not only help to shape the professional development of our future physicians, they also influence their career choices. This review has highlighted two main challenges in doctor role modelling: the first challenge lies in our lack of understanding of the complex phenomenon of role modelling. Second, the literature draws attention to negative role modelling and this negative influence requires deeper exploration to identify ways to mitigate adverse effects. This BEME review offers a preliminary guide to future discovery and progress in the area of doctor role modelling.

Assessment of professionalism: recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference.

Over the past 25 years, professionalism has emerged as a substantive and sustained theme, the operationalization and measurement of which has become a major concern for those involved in medical education. However, how to go about establishing the elements that constitute appropriate professionalism in order to assess them is difficult. Using a discourse analysis approach, the International Ottawa Conference Working Group on Professionalism studied some of the dominant notions of professionalism, and in particular the implications for its assessment. The results presented here reveal different ways of thinking about professionalism that can lead towards a multi-dimensional, multi-paradigmatic approach to assessing professionalism at different levels: individual, inter-personal, societal-institutional. Recommendations for research about professionalism assessment are also presented.

Viewpoint: the elephant in medical professionalism's kitchen.

The rise of the corporation within health care during the 1980s and early 1990s was met by organized medicine with a deluge of editorials, articles, and books that identified a singular enemy--commercialism--and depicted it as corrosive of, and antithetical to, medical professionalism. Medicine's ire proved prognostic as scores of highly publicized corporate-medical scandals began to crater the landscape of a rapidly emerging "medical marketplace." Medicine's main weapon in this counteroffensive was a renewed call to medical professionalism. Numerous organizations hosted conferences and underwrote initiatives to define, measure, and ultimately inculcate professionalism as a core medical competency. Nonetheless, an examination of medicine's overall response to the threat of commercialism reveals inconsistencies and schisms between these praiseworthy efforts and a parallel absence of action at the community practitioner and peer-review levels. The most recent salvo in this war on commercialism is a policy proposal by influential medical leaders who call for an end to the market incentives linking academic health centers and medical schools with industry. These forthright proposals nevertheless appear once again not to address the heartbeat of professional social control: community-based peer review, including a vigorous and proactive role by state medical boards. The author concludes by examining the implications of a professionalism bereft of peer review and explores the societal-level responsibilities of organized medicine to protect, nurture, and expand the role of the physician to maintain the values and ideals of professionalism against the countervailing social forces of the free market and bureaucracy.