• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Recommendations to address and research systemic bias in assessment: perspectives from directors of research in medical education.解决和研究评估中系统性偏见的建议:医学教育研究主任的观点。
Med Educ Online. 2024 Dec 31;29(1):2396166. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2024.2396166. Epub 2024 Sep 8.
2
The do's, don'ts and don't knows of redressing differential attainment related to race/ethnicity in medical schools.纠正医学院种族/民族相关差异的方法、禁忌和未知因素。
Perspect Med Educ. 2022 Jan;11(1):1-14. doi: 10.1007/s40037-021-00696-3. Epub 2021 Dec 29.
3
Guidelines: The do's, don'ts and don't knows of direct observation of clinical skills in medical education.指南:医学教育中临床技能直接观察的注意事项、禁忌事项及未知事项。
Perspect Med Educ. 2017 Oct;6(5):286-305. doi: 10.1007/s40037-017-0376-7.
4
Guidelines: The Do's, Don'ts and Don't Knows of Creating Open Educational Resources.指南:创建开放教育资源的可做、不可做和未知事项。
Perspect Med Educ. 2023 Jan 9;12(1):25-40. doi: 10.5334/pme.817. eCollection 2023.
5
Guidelines: the do's, don'ts and don't knows of feedback for clinical education.指南:临床教育反馈的注意事项、禁忌及未知情况
Perspect Med Educ. 2015 Dec;4(6):284-299. doi: 10.1007/s40037-015-0231-7.
6
Guidelines: The dos, don'ts and don't knows of remediation in medical education.指南:医学教育补救的可做、不可做和未知事项。
Perspect Med Educ. 2019 Dec;8(6):322-338. doi: 10.1007/s40037-019-00544-5.
7
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
8
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
9
The do's, don't and don't knows of supporting transition to more independent practice.支持向更独立的实践过渡的可做、不可做和未知事项。
Perspect Med Educ. 2018 Feb;7(1):8-22. doi: 10.1007/s40037-018-0403-3.
10
Recovery schools for improving behavioral and academic outcomes among students in recovery from substance use disorders: a systematic review.改善物质使用障碍康复期学生行为和学业成果的康复学校:一项系统综述
Campbell Syst Rev. 2018 Oct 4;14(1):1-86. doi: 10.4073/csr.2018.9. eCollection 2018.

本文引用的文献

1
"My Assessments Are Biased!" Measurement and Sociocultural Approaches to Achieve Fairness in Assessment in Medical Education.“我的评估存在偏见!”医学教育评估中实现公平的测量和社会文化方法。
Acad Med. 2023 Aug 1;98(8S):S16-S27. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000005245. Epub 2023 Jul 21.
2
The Long Shadow: A Historical Perspective on Racism in Medical Education.《阴影之绵长:医学教育中种族主义的历史透视》
Acad Med. 2023 Aug 1;98(8S):S28-S36. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000005253. Epub 2023 Apr 19.
3
Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation Conference on Ensuring Fairness in Medical Education Assessment: Conference Recommendations Report.小约西亚·梅西基金会关于确保医学教育评估公平性的会议:会议建议报告。
Acad Med. 2023 Aug 1;98(8S):S3-S15. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000005243. Epub 2023 Apr 18.
4
The do's, don'ts and don't knows of redressing differential attainment related to race/ethnicity in medical schools.纠正医学院种族/民族相关差异的方法、禁忌和未知因素。
Perspect Med Educ. 2022 Jan;11(1):1-14. doi: 10.1007/s40037-021-00696-3. Epub 2021 Dec 29.
5
Medical Education's Wicked Problem: Achieving Equity in Assessment for Medical Learners.医学教育的棘手问题:实现医学学习者评估中的公平。
Acad Med. 2020 Dec;95(12S Addressing Harmful Bias and Eliminating Discrimination in Health Professions Learning Environments):S98-S108. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003717.
6
A Review of the Quality Indicators of Rigor in Qualitative Research.一项关于定性研究严谨性质量指标的综述。
Am J Pharm Educ. 2020 Jan;84(1):7120. doi: 10.5688/ajpe7120.
7
Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Clinical Grading in Medical School.医学院临床评分中的种族/民族差异。
Teach Learn Med. 2019 Oct-Dec;31(5):487-496. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2019.1597724. Epub 2019 Apr 29.
8
How Small Differences in Assessed Clinical Performance Amplify to Large Differences in Grades and Awards: A Cascade With Serious Consequences for Students Underrepresented in Medicine.评估临床绩效的微小差异如何放大为成绩和奖励的巨大差异:对医学领域代表性不足的学生产生严重后果的级联效应。
Acad Med. 2018 Sep;93(9):1286-1292. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002323.
9
Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.定性内容分析的三种方法。
Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88. doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687.

解决和研究评估中系统性偏见的建议:医学教育研究主任的观点。

Recommendations to address and research systemic bias in assessment: perspectives from directors of research in medical education.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Department of Medical Education, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.

出版信息

Med Educ Online. 2024 Dec 31;29(1):2396166. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2024.2396166. Epub 2024 Sep 8.

DOI:10.1080/10872981.2024.2396166
PMID:39244774
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11382691/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Addressing systemic bias in medical school assessment is an urgent task for medical education. This paper outlines recommendations on topic areas for further research on systemic bias, developed from a workshop discussion at the 2023 annual meeting of the Society of Directors of Research in Medical Education.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During the workshop, directors engaged in small-group discussions on guidelines to address bias in assessment practices following a proposed categorization of 'Do's,' 'Don'ts,' and 'Don't knows' and listed their insights using anonymous sticky notes, which were shared and discussed with the larger group of participants. The authors performed a content analysis of the notes through deductive and inductive coding. We reviewed and discussed our analysis to reach consensus.

RESULTS

The workshop included 31 participants from 28 institutions across the US and Canada, generating 51 unique notes. Participants identified 23 research areas in need of further study. The inductive analysis of proposed research areas revealed four main topics: 1) The role of interventions, including pre-medical academic interventions, medical-education interventions, assessment approaches, and wellness interventions; 2) Professional development, including the definition and assessment of professionalism and professional identity formation; 3) Context, including patient care and systemic influences; and 4) Research approaches.

DISCUSSION

While limited to data from a single workshop, the results offered perspectives about areas for further research shared by a group of directors of medical education research units from diverse backgrounds. The workshop produced valuable insights into the need for more evidence-based interventions that promote more equitable assessment practices grounded in real-world situations and that attenuate the effects of bias.

摘要

简介

解决医学院校评估中的系统性偏见是医学教育的当务之急。本文概述了在 2023 年医学教育研究主任学会年会上的一个研讨会讨论的关于系统性偏见进一步研究主题领域的建议。

材料与方法

在研讨会上,主任们围绕在提出的“做、不做和不知道”分类下解决评估实践中的偏见的指导方针进行了小组讨论,并使用匿名便利贴列出了他们的见解,这些便利贴与更大的参与者群体进行了分享和讨论。作者通过演绎和归纳编码对这些笔记进行了内容分析。我们对分析进行了审查和讨论,以达成共识。

结果

该研讨会包括来自美国和加拿大 28 个机构的 31 名参与者,共产生了 51 个独特的便签。参与者确定了 23 个需要进一步研究的研究领域。对拟议研究领域的归纳分析揭示了四个主要主题:1)干预措施的作用,包括医学前学术干预措施、医学教育干预措施、评估方法和健康干预措施;2)专业发展,包括专业精神和专业身份形成的定义和评估;3)背景,包括患者护理和系统影响;4)研究方法。

讨论

尽管该结果仅限于单个研讨会的数据,但它提供了来自不同背景的医学教育研究单位主任们对进一步研究领域的观点。该研讨会深入了解了需要更多基于证据的干预措施的必要性,这些干预措施可以促进更公平的评估实践,这些实践基于现实情况,并减轻偏见的影响。