Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA.
Boston University Institute for Health System Innovation and Policy, Boston, MA.
Fam Med. 2021 Jun;53(6):461-466. doi: 10.22454/FamMed.2021.267781.
Scholarship is recognized as a challenge in many family medicine residency programs. Among evaluations of scholarship curricula, few describe resident experiences of such interventions. To bridge this gap in knowledge, we measured resident confidence, satisfaction, and participation before and after implementing a new scholarship curriculum.
The redesigned curriculum included a structured project timeline, resident research in progress meetings, faculty mentorship, scholarly skills workshops, and mentored journal clubs. We conducted a curriculum evaluation via surveys of residents prior to implementation and after years 1 and 2, measuring satisfaction with the scholarly environment and opportunities, and confidence and participation in specific scholarly activities using Likert scales from 1 (least confidence) to 5.
Compared to baseline (n=28), after 2 years (n=27) of the curriculum, residents reported increased mean confidence in critical appraisal of scientific articles (2.6±1.1 to 3.3±0.7, P=.007), carrying out a scholarly project (2.5±0.8 to 3.4±1.0, P=.005), and writing an abstract (3.0±0.8 to 3.8±0.7, P=.002). As compared to the first year, more residents in the second year participated in quality improvement projects (7.1% vs 29.6%, P=.031) and wrote conference abstracts (10.7% vs 37.0%, P=.022). Over the same period, those very satisfied with the scholarly environment increased from 0 (0%) to 8 (29.6%, P=.017). The June 2020 survey identified increased interest in scholarship because of the antiracism movement (51.9%) and COVID-19 pandemic (40.7%).
Implementation of a redesigned scholarship curriculum was associated with increases in family medicine resident scholarship confidence and satisfaction.
学术研究能力在许多家庭医学住院医师培训项目中都被视为一项挑战。在对学术研究课程的评估中,很少有研究描述居民对这些干预措施的体验。为了弥补这一知识空白,我们在实施新的学术研究课程前后,衡量了居民的信心、满意度和参与度。
重新设计的课程包括结构化的项目时间表、居民研究进展会议、教师指导、学术技能研讨会和指导期刊俱乐部。我们在实施前和实施 1 年后和 2 年后通过对居民进行课程评估,通过李克特量表(1 表示最不自信,5 表示最自信)衡量对学术环境和机会的满意度,以及对特定学术活动的信心和参与度。
与基线(n=28)相比,在课程实施 2 年后(n=27),居民报告称,在评估科学文章的批判性、开展学术项目和撰写摘要方面的信心显著提高(分别为 2.6±1.1 至 3.3±0.7,P=.007;2.5±0.8 至 3.4±1.0,P=.005;3.0±0.8 至 3.8±0.7,P=.002)。与第一年相比,第二年有更多的居民参与了质量改进项目(7.1%比 29.6%,P=.031)和撰写会议摘要(10.7%比 37.0%,P=.022)。在此期间,对学术环境非常满意的居民比例从 0(0%)增加到 8(29.6%,P=.017)。2020 年 6 月的调查显示,由于反种族主义运动(51.9%)和 COVID-19 大流行(40.7%),居民对学术研究的兴趣有所增加。
实施重新设计的学术研究课程与家庭医学住院医师学术研究能力的信心和满意度的提高有关。