Webb Allison M B, Tsipis Nicholas E, McClellan Taylor R, McNeil Michael J, Xu MengMeng, Doty Joseph P, Taylor Dean C
Ms. Webb is a fourth-year medical student, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. Mr. Tsipis is a fourth-year medical student, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. Mr. McClellan is a fourth-year medical student, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. Mr. McNeil is a fourth-year medical student, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. Ms. Xu is a fourth-year MD-PhD student, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. Dr. Doty is chief of staff, Feagin Leadership Program, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. Dr. Taylor is professor, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, director, Duke Sports Medicine Fellowship Program, and chair, Feagin Leadership Program, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Acad Med. 2014 Nov;89(11):1563-70. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000502.
To characterize leadership curricula in undergraduate medical education as a first step toward understanding best practices in leadership education.
The authors systematically searched the PubMed, Education Resources Information Center, Academic Search Complete, and Education Full Text databases for peer-reviewed English-language articles published 1980-2014 describing curricula with interventions to teach medical students leadership skills. They characterized educational settings, curricular format, and learner and instructor types. They assessed effectiveness and quality of evidence using five-point scales adapted from Kirkpatrick's four-level training evaluation model (scale: 0-4) and a Best Evidence Medical Education guide (scale: 1-5), respectively. They classified leadership skills taught into the five Medical Leadership Competency Framework (MLCF) domains.
Twenty articles describing 24 curricula met inclusion criteria. The majority of curricula (17; 71%) were longitudinal, delivered over periods of one semester to four years. The most common setting was the classroom (12; 50%). Curricula were frequently provided to both preclinical and clinical students (11; 46%); many (9; 28%) employed clinical faculty as instructors. The majority (19; 79%) addressed at least three MLCF domains; most common were working with others (21; 88%) and managing services (18; 75%). The median effectiveness score was 1.5, and the median quality of evidence score was 2.
Most studies did not demonstrate changes in student behavior or quantifiable results. Aligning leadership curricula with competency models, such as the MLCF, would create opportunities to standardize evaluation of outcomes, leading to better measurement of student competency and a better understanding of best practices.
对本科医学教育中的领导力课程进行特征描述,作为理解领导力教育最佳实践的第一步。
作者系统检索了PubMed、教育资源信息中心、学术搜索完整版和教育全文数据库,以查找1980年至2014年发表的同行评审英文文章,这些文章描述了采用干预措施教授医学生领导力技能的课程。他们对教育环境、课程形式以及学习者和教师类型进行了特征描述。他们分别使用从柯克帕特里克四级培训评估模型改编的五点量表(量表:0 - 4)和最佳证据医学教育指南(量表:1 - 5)评估了证据的有效性和质量。他们将所教授的领导力技能分类到五个医学领导力能力框架(MLCF)领域。
20篇描述24门课程的文章符合纳入标准。大多数课程(17门;71%)是纵向课程,授课时间为一学期至四年。最常见的授课环境是课堂(12个;50%)。课程经常面向临床前和临床学生(11个;46%);许多课程(9个;28%)聘请临床教师作为授课教师。大多数课程(19个;79%)涉及至少三个MLCF领域;最常见的是与他人合作(21个;88%)和管理服务(18个;75%)。有效性得分中位数为1.5,证据质量得分中位数为2。
大多数研究未显示学生行为的变化或可量化的结果。使领导力课程与能力模型(如MLCF)保持一致,将创造机会使结果评估标准化,从而更好地衡量学生能力并更好地理解最佳实践。