What Do Pediatric Subinterns Say About Their Learning and Assessment? A Qualitative Analysis of Individual Learning Plans.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a qualitative content analysis of learning and assessment strategies that pediatric subinterns describe in Individualized Learning Plans (ILPs) and to explore barriers and facilitators to their learning. METHODS: We analyzed ILPs from medical students enrolled in pediatric subinternships at 10 US medical schools that utilized a standardized curriculum and were recruited to reflect diversity in geographic location, funding, and enrollment. Students used an ILP to record 3 or more selected learning objectives, rationale for selection, and reflection on learning and assessment strategies. Investigators used the constant comparative method to perform a content analysis of the ILPs, grouping codes into themes, and verifying relationships between codes within themes. RESULTS: Two hundred and four ILPs that included student reflections on 850 learning objectives were analyzed. Content was analyzed in 5 categories: rationale for selecting objectives, learning strategies, assessment strategies, challenges to learning, and facilitators of learning. Students showed strong commitment to individualized, self-directed learning, developed a wide range of creative learning strategies, and relied heavily on self-reflection to assess their progress. The learning environment both helped and hindered students' ability to make and assess progress on their selected learning objectives. CONCLUSIONS: Through ILP-guided reflection and a formal curriculum, students can choose well-justified learning objectives and demonstrate resourcefulness and independence in developing self-directed learning and assessment strategies. The strategies that students identified in this study provide a menu of learning and assessment options for subinterns. Identified challenges and facilitators of learning provide guidance for educators who seek to enhance the clinical learning environment.

Evaluation of a National Pediatric Subinternship Curriculum Implemented Through Individual Learning Plans.

OBJECTIVE: The Council on Medical Student Education in Pediatrics and Association of Pediatric Program Directors developed a Pediatric Subinternship (CAPS) curriculum for use with an individualized learning plan (ILP). The authors determined which learning objectives (LOs) pediatric subinterns selected when provided the CAPS curriculum, summarized students' self-reported progress, and determined feasibility of ILPs in subinternship. METHODS: Students from 10 medical schools completed a standardized ILP during pediatric subinternship. Students listed ≥3 LOs using CAPS curriculum as a guide and self-assessed their progress. Students reviewed ILPs with faculty preceptors; preceptors completed questionnaires on time and effort spent. Authors mapped student LOs to CAPS curriculum objectives and grouped in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competency domains. RESULTS: Two hundred four students documented 850 LOs. Authors mapped student LOs to 61 of the 69 CAPS objectives (88%). Students most commonly chose Patient Care LOs, with the top 3 related to oral presentations, time management, and management plans. Student LOs not in CAPS addressed nutrition, child development, test interpretation, and cost. No students chose LOs related to health disparities, shared decision making, informed consent, or patient safety. Students self-reported significant progress on most LOs (73%). Faculty met with students ≥1 time and 93% met for a total of ≤1 hour. According to faculty, students required little or no help completing ILPs. CONCLUSIONS: Students chose a wide range of LOs when provided the CAPS curriculum. Revision to include additional student-identified LOs would enhance CAPS curriculum's comprehensiveness. Using this curriculum with an ILP during subinternship is feasible, but gaps between educator-identified and student-identified objectives require further exploration.

Assessment of medical student clinical reasoning by "lay" vs physician raters: inter-rater reliability using a scoring guide in a multidisciplinary objective structured clinical examination.

BACKGROUND: To determine whether a "lay" rater could assess clinical reasoning, interrater reliability was measured between physician and lay raters of patient notes written by medical students as part of an 8-station objective structured clinical examination. METHODS: Seventy-five notes were rated on core elements of clinical reasoning by physician and lay raters independently, using a scoring guide developed by physician consensus. Twenty-five notes were rerated by a 2nd physician rater as an expert control. Kappa statistics and simple percentage agreement were calculated in 3 areas: evidence for and against each diagnosis and diagnostic workup. RESULTS: Agreement between physician and lay raters for the top diagnosis was as follows: supporting evidence, 89% (κ = .72); evidence against, 89% (κ = .81); and diagnostic workup, 79% (κ = .58). Physician rater agreement was 83% (κ = .59), 92% (κ = .87), and 96% (κ = .87), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using a comprehensive scoring guide, interrater reliability for physician and lay raters was comparable with reliability between 2 expert physician raters.

Teaching patient communication skills to medical students: a review of randomized controlled trials.

Tools to examine the effects of teaching interventions across a variety of studies are needed. The authors perform a meta-analysis of 24 randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of teaching on medical students' patient communication skills. Study quality is rated using a modified Jadad score, and standardized mean difference effect size (d) measures are calculated. Fifteen of 24 studies have sufficient data for analysis. Students' ability to establish rapport improves after teaching. The effects are large when the teaching intervention was small group discussion (n = 5) or giving structured feedback on a student-patient interview (n = 6). A similar effect of teaching is seen on student data gathering skills (n = 5). Teaching medical students patient communication skills using small group discussion or providing feedback on a student-patient interview results in improvement in student performance.