Does Educational Handover Influence Subsequent Assessment?

PURPOSE: Educational handover (i.e., providing information about learners' past performance) is controversial. Proponents argue handover could help tailor learning opportunities. Opponents fear it could bias subsequent assessments and lead to self-fulfilling prophecies. This study examined whether raters provided with reports describing learners' minor weaknesses would generate different assessment scores or narrative comments than those who did not receive such reports. METHOD: In this 2018 mixed-methods, randomized, controlled, experimental study, clinical supervisors from 5 postgraduate (residency) programs were randomized into 3 groups receiving no educational handover (control), educational handover describing weaknesses in medical expertise, and educational handover describing weaknesses in communication. All participants watched the same videos of 2 simulated resident-patient encounters and assessed performance using a shortened mini-clinical evaluation exercise form. The authors compared mean scores, percentages of negative comments, comments focusing on medical expertise, and comments focusing on communication across experimental groups using analyses of variance. They examined potential moderating effects of supervisor experience, gender, and mindsets (fixed vs growth). RESULTS: Seventy-two supervisors participated. There was no effect of handover report on assessment scores (F(2, 69) = 0.31, P = .74) or percentage of negative comments (F(2, 60) = 0.33, P = .72). Participants who received a report indicating weaknesses in communication generated a higher percentage of comments on communication than the control group (63% vs 50%, P = .03). Participants who received a report indicating weaknesses in medical expertise generated a similar percentage of comments on expertise compared to the controls (46% vs 47%, P = .98). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides initial empirical data about the effects of educational handover and suggests it can-in some circumstances-lead to more targeted feedback without influencing scores. Further studies are required to examine the influence of reports for a variety of performance levels, areas of weakness, and learners.

Learner handover: Perspectives and recommendations from the front-line.

INTRODUCTION: Current medical education models increasingly rely on longitudinal assessments to document learner progress over time. This longitudinal focus has re-kindled discussion regarding learner handover-where assessments are shared across supervisors, rotations, and educational phases, to support learner growth and ease transitions. The authors explored the opinions of, experiences with, and recommendations for successful implementation of learner handover among clinical supervisors. METHODS: Clinical supervisors from five postgraduate medical education programs at one institution completed an online questionnaire exploring their views regarding learner handover, specifically: potential benefits, risks, and suggestions for implementation. Survey items included open-ended and numerical responses. The authors used an inductive content analysis approach to analyze the open-ended questionnaire responses, and descriptive and correlational analyses for numerical data. RESULTS: Seventy-two participants completed the questionnaire. Their perspectives varied widely. Suggested benefits of learner handover included tailored learning, improved assessments, and enhanced patient safety. The main reported risk was the potential for learner handover to bias supervisors' perceptions of learners, thereby affecting the validity of future assessments and influencing the learner's educational opportunities and well-being. Participants' suggestions for implementation focused on who should be involved, when and for whom it should occur, and the content that should be shared. DISCUSSION: The diverse opinions of, and recommendations for, learner handover highlight the necessity for handover to maximize learning potential while minimizing potential harms. Supervisors' suggestions for handover implementation reveal tensions between assessment-of and for-learning.

Government policy and agricultural production: a scoping review to inform research and policy on healthy agricultural commodities.

Unhealthy foods and tobacco remain the leading causes of non-communicable disease (NCDs). These are key agricultural commodities for many countries, and NCD prevention policy needs to consider how to influence production towards healthier options. There has been little scholarship to bridge the agriculture with the public health literature that seeks to address the supply of healthy commodities. This scoping review synthesizes the literature on government agricultural policy and production in order to 1) present a typology of policies used to influence agricultural production, 2) to provide a preliminary overview of the ways that impact is assessed in this literature, and 3) to bring this literature into conversation with the literature on food and tobacco supply.This review analyzes the literature on government agricultural policy and production. Articles written in English and published between January 1997 and April 2018 (20-year range) were included. Only quantitative evaluations were included. Studies that collected qualitative data to supplement the quantitative analysis were also included. One hundred and three articles were included for data extraction. The following information was extracted: article details (e.g., author, title, journal), policy details (e.g., policy tools, goals, context), methods used to evaluate the policy (e.g., outcomes evaluated, sample size, limitations), and study findings. Fifty four studies examined the impact of policy on agricultural production. The remaining articles assessed land allocation (n = 25) (e.g., crop diversification, acreage expansion), efficiency (n = 23), rates of employment including on- and off-farm employment (n = 18), and farm income (n = 17) among others. Input supports, output supports and technical support had an impact on production, income and other outcomes. Although there were important exceptions, largely attributed to farm level allocation of labour or resources. Financial supports were most commonly evaluated including cash subsidies, credit, and tax benefits. This type of support resulted in an equal number of studies reporting increased production as those with no effects.This review provides initial extrapolative insights from the general literature on the impact of government policies on agricultural production. This review can inform dialogue between the health and agricultural sector and evaluative research on policy for alternatives to tobacco production and unhealthy food supply.

Ethical Challenges in the Provision of Mental Health Services for Children and Families During Disasters.

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: As mental health professionals assist individuals and communities affected by disaster, they are likely to encounter ethical issues. We conducted a review of academic and grey literature to identify ethical issues associated with the provision of mental health care during disasters, with particular attention to children and families. RECENT FINDINGS: We identified nine categories of ethical challenge: ensuring competent care; protecting confidentiality and privacy; obtaining informed consent and respecting autonomy; providing culturally sensitive care; avoiding harm; allocating limited resources; maintaining neutrality and avoiding bias; addressing issues of liability and employer responsibilities; and conducting research ethically. The organization and provision of mental health services during disasters presents ethical challenges for care providers-as well as for communities, coordinators, and policymakers. Mental health professionals need to navigate this ethical terrain in order to provide needed care to individuals and communities affected by crisis.

Development and preliminary validation of the Scleroderma Support Group Leader Self-efficacy Scale.

Support groups are an important resource for people living with systemic sclerosis (SSc; scleroderma). Peer support group leaders play an important role in the success and sustainability of SSc support groups, but face challenges that include a lack of formal training. An SSc support group leader training program could improve leader self-efficacy to carry out important leadership tasks, including the management of group dynamics. However, no measures exist to assess self-efficacy among SSc support group leaders. The objective of this study was to develop and provide preliminary evidence on the reliability and validity of the Scleroderma Support Group Leader Self-efficacy Scale (SSGLSS). The SSGLSS was administered to two sets of SSc support group leaders from North America, Europe, and Australia. Study 1 participants (n = 102) completed the SSGLSS only. Study 2 participants (n = 55) completed the SSGLSS and the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI). For both studies, we evaluated internal consistency reliability using Cronbach's coefficient alpha. Convergent validity was assessed in Study 2 using Pearson correlations of the SSGLSS with the OLBI exhaustion and disengagement subscales. Cronbach's alpha was 0.96 in Study 1 and 0.95 in Study 2. Consistent with our hypotheses, there was a small negative correlation between SSGLSS scores and the OLBI exhaustion subscale (r = -0.25, p<0.01) and a moderate negative correlation between SSGLSS scores and the disengagement subscale (r = -0.38, p<0.01). These results suggest that the SSGLSS is a reliable and valid measure of self-efficacy for carrying out support group leadership tasks.