Explore the vast range of titles available.

While explicit conceptual models help to inform research, they are left out of much of the health professions education (HPE) literature. One reason may be the limited understanding about how to develop conceptual models with intention and rigor. Group concept mapping (GCM) is a mixed methods conceptualization approach that has been used to develop frameworks for planning and evaluation, but GCM has not been common in HPE. The purpose of this article is to describe GCM in order to make it more accessible for HPE scholars. We recount the origins and evolution of GCM and summarize its core features: GCM can combine multiple stakeholder perspectives in a systematic and inclusive manner to generate explicit conceptual models. Based on the literature and prior experience using GCM, we detail seven steps in GCM: (1) brainstorming ideas to a specific “focus prompt,” (2) preparing ideas by removing duplicates and editing for consistency, (3) sorting ideas according to conceptual similarity, (4) generating the point map through quantitative analysis, (5) interpreting cluster map options, (6) summarizing the final concept map, and (7) reporting and using the map. We provide illustrative examples from HPE studies and compare GCM to other conceptualization methods. GCM has great potential to add to the myriad of methodologies open to HPE researchers. Its alignment with principles of diversity and inclusivity, as well as the need to be systematic in applying theoretical and conceptual frameworks to practice, make it a method well suited for the complexities of contemporary HPE scholarship.

Social media may promote knowledge sharing but what users do with the new knowledge and how it may influence practice remains to be known. This exploratory study used a social constructivist lens to understand how health professions educators and researchers integrate knowledge from social media into their respective practices. We purposively sampled health professions educators and researchers using the hashtags #MedEd, #HPE, and #HealthProfessionsEducation on Twitter/X. We obtained informed consent, conducted interviews via videoconference, and engaged in multiple cycles of deductive and inductive coding and analysis. Participants identified as educators and researchers ( n  = 12), as researchers ( n  = 1), or as educators ( n  = 1) from Canada ( n  = 8), the United States ( n  = 3), and Switzerland, Ireland, and China ( n  = 1, respectively). Eight participants actively used social media (i.e., creating/posting original content); six participants indicated passive use (i.e., reading/retweeting content). They discussed the importance of crafting a consumable message and social media identity to streamline the content shared. Social media’s accessible, non-hierarchical nature may facilitate knowledge-sharing, whereas the potential spread of misinformation and technological requirements (e.g., internet access, country-specific restrictions on platforms) present barriers to uptake. Participants described using knowledge gained from social media as teaching tools, new research methodologies, new theoretical frameworks, and low-risk clinical interventions. Previous research has demonstrated how social media has empirically been used for diffusion or dissemination rather than as an active process of evidence uptake. Using knowledge translation frameworks, like the Knowledge to Action or Theoretical Domains frameworks, to inform social media-based knowledge sharing activities in health professions education is recommended.

The field of health professions education research draws inspiration from many disciplines, creating a dynamic socio-cultural context that is replete with contests over research rigour and quality. These knowledge politics are never definitively resolved. Thus, an important question that any graduate program established within the field has to contend with is what should constitute expertise in HPER. In this paper we explore interrelated contextual, conceptual and procedural dimensions of expertise to substantiate our suggestions for a core curriculum for graduate students in health professions education. We argue that an expert in health professions education research should have both an appreciation of when knowledge politics are relevant to their research process as part of their procedural knowledge and also an awareness of why these politics can affect their work as part of their conceptual knowledge.

ABSTRACT Objective: To explore the attributes of health profession educationists in the departments of medical education in their institutions. Study Design: Exploratory qualitative study. Place and Duration of Study: Public and Private Sector Medical and Dental Colleges, Pakistan from Mar to Jul 2022. Methodology: The total number of participants was fifteen, including the Head of the Department and faculty members of DME. Consent was taken, and online scheduled interviews were conducted in English via Zoom software. The researcher recorded, transcribed, and analyzed the data manually. Another researcher rechecked it, and when saturation was a chieved, data collection was stopped. The interviews were manually transcribed, followed by coding and thematic analysis of the data. Results: After thematic analysis, three Themes, 15 sub-themes, and 30 codes emerged. The themes were personality traits, working relationships, and commitment to excellence. For the successful accomplishment of DME's challenging tasks, HPE faculty are found to be altruistic, responsible, motivated, enthusiastic, resilient, work with passion, and humble. They are visionary, innovative, cooperative, and have multi-tasking and convincing capabilities. With these attributes, HPE faculty efficiently manage uncertainty and challenging situations. Conclusion: The Habitus (attributes of value-driven, resilience, hardworking, passionate, consistent, patient, visionary, and innovative) led to the execution of DME tasks despite limited field (resistance from administration, faculty, and organization) and capital (deficient human, infrastructural and financial resources)

Recently, the balance between value and necessity of ethical review of health professions education research has been debated. At present, there are large differences in how ethical review of research proposals for health professions education is organized. We present a framework that describes the organization of ethical review in health professions education research, based on the interpersonal circumplex model, also known as Leary's Rose. The framework is based on the two main balances in ethical review of health professions education research, being the protectiveness for the subjects and how ethical review is organized and responsibilities are shared. The axis/balance of protectiveness ranges between the extremes \"paternalistic protective\" to \"liberal permissive\". The axis/balance of organization and responsibility ranges between the extremes of \"centralized\" to \"local/decentralized\". This model offers insight in the position of an ethical review board and shows the dynamics of the decisions for ethical approval and the consequences of the different approaches to the organization of ethical review of health professions education research. Keywords: ethical review, health professions education research, ethical approval of health professions education research

Professional identity formation, an important component of education, is influenced by participation, social relationships, and culture in communities of practice. As a preliminary investigation of dental hygienists’ professional identity formation, this study examined changes in the dental hygiene students’ perceptions of oral health professionals over the three years of their undergraduate program. At a Japanese dental hygiene school, 40 students participated in surveys with open-ended questions about professional groups several times during their studies. The text data were analyzed through content analysis with text mining software. The themes that characterized their dental hygienist profession perceptions in their programs each year were identified as: “Supporters at the dental clinic”; “Engagement with interprofessional care” and “Improved problem-solving skills for clinical issues regarding the oral region”; and “Active contribution to general health” and “Recognition of the roles considering relationships” (in the first, second, and third years, respectively). The students acquired professional knowledge and recognized the significance and roles of oral health professionals in practice. They gained more learning experiences in their education, including clinical placements and interprofessional education. This study provides insight into curriculum development for professional identity formation in dental hygiene students.

Background: The prevalence of substance use disorders (SUDs) is an alarming problem in the United States; however, only a fraction of patients receive treatment. Stigma from both healthcare professionals and society at large negatively impacts SUD treatment. There are limited data regarding the perceptions of healthcare students on SUD stigma as a health disparity. Methods: We conducted a concurrent mixed-methods study among students enrolled in six health-related colleges at one mid-south health science center in the US over 3 months. Both an electronic survey consisting of 17 close-ended questions and researcher-led focus groups were conducted to understand their perceptions of stigma and SUDs. The research team followed the six steps recommended by Braun and Clarke regarding the data that aimed to capture associations between categories and extract and conceptualize the themes, and thematic analysis was done using Dedoose® (Manhattan Beach, CA, USA) qualitative software, which facilitated all the codes being kept organized and compared the frequency of codes across categories. Results: A total of n = 428 students participated in the survey (response rate = 13%), and n = 31 students took part in five focus groups. Most student respondents, on average, either agreed or strongly agreed that: stigma currently exists in the healthcare field; stigma can lead to patients’ not receiving the appropriate care for an SUD; and stigma can lead to lower quality care provided to patients with SUDs. Two themes were identified based on the thematic analysis: (1) additional training is necessary to better equip students for addressing SUDs in practice and (2) suggestions were formed to develop synergy between didactic and clinical rotations to improve SUD training. Conclusions: It is evident that students perceive the stigma surrounding SUDs as a detriment to patient care. Opportunities may exist in professional training programs to more seamlessly and intentionally weave SUD treatment and management concepts throughout the curriculum, as well as to empower students to operate in the complex regulatory scheme that exists for SUDs in the US.

Portfolios are an organized and thoughtful presentation of an individuals education, work samples, and skills. Recently, learning through portfolios is gaining due significance in higher education as it involves personal goal statements, reflections, and philosophies, which instills lifelong and self-regulated learning skills. The metacognitive process involved in reflection creates a greater understanding of both the self and the situation which in turn influences future actions. Electronic portfolios have almost replaced paper-based portfolios as they impart the chance to review, communicate, and give feedback in an asynchronous manner. Apart from the obvious benefits, they also help parent institutes to keep track and update about performance of their students on the professional front. Web-based portfolios allow the learner and teacher to remain associated even past the academic years and share viewpoints. The significance of Reflective Learning for competent health professionals needs to be realized, and efforts should be directed to explore the potential benefits of reflective portfolios in Indian medical schools. It is suggested that piloting portfolios in medical schools will serve the dual purpose of orienting stakeholders and generating evidence about its applicability and acceptability in medical education. [Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol 2016; 6(3.000): 263-265]

Virtual reality (VR) is a technology that allows the user to explore and manipulate computer-generated real or artificial three-dimensional multimedia sensory environments in real time to gain practical knowledge that can be used in clinical practice. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of VR for educating health professionals and improving their knowledge, cognitive skills, attitudes, and satisfaction. We performed a systematic review of the effectiveness of VR in pre- and postregistration health professions education following the gold standard Cochrane methodology. We searched 7 databases from the year 1990 to August 2017. No language restrictions were applied. We included randomized controlled trials and cluster-randomized trials. We independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, and then, we compared the information in pairs. We contacted authors of the studies for additional information if necessary. All pooled analyses were based on random-effects models. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to rate the quality of the body of evidence. A total of 31 studies (2407 participants) were included. Meta-analysis of 8 studies found that VR slightly improves postintervention knowledge scores when compared with traditional learning (standardized mean difference [SMD]=0.44; 95% CI 0.18-0.69; I =49%; 603 participants; moderate certainty evidence) or other types of digital education such as online or offline digital education (SMD=0.43; 95% CI 0.07-0.79; I =78%; 608 participants [8 studies]; low certainty evidence). Another meta-analysis of 4 studies found that VR improves health professionals' cognitive skills when compared with traditional learning (SMD=1.12; 95% CI 0.81-1.43; I =0%; 235 participants; large effect size; moderate certainty evidence). Two studies compared the effect of VR with other forms of digital education on skills, favoring the VR group (SMD=0.5; 95% CI 0.32-0.69; I =0%; 467 participants; moderate effect size; low certainty evidence). The findings for attitudes and satisfaction were mixed and inconclusive. None of the studies reported any patient-related outcomes, behavior change, as well as unintended or adverse effects of VR. Overall, the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE criteria ranged from low to moderate. We downgraded our certainty of evidence primarily because of the risk of bias and/or inconsistency. We found evidence suggesting that VR improves postintervention knowledge and skills outcomes of health professionals when compared with traditional education or other types of digital education such as online or offline digital education. The findings on other outcomes are limited. Future research should evaluate the effectiveness of immersive and interactive forms of VR and evaluate other outcomes such as attitude, satisfaction, cost-effectiveness, and clinical practice or behavior change.

Recently, due to scarce resources and the need to provide an evidence-base for healthcare professions’ education (HPE), HPE research centres internationally have turned to identifying priorities for their research efforts. Engaging a range of stakeholders in research priority setting exercises has been posited as one way to address the issues around reducing researcher bias and increasing social accountability. However, assigning individuals to single a priori stakeholder groups is complex, with previous research overlooking cross-category membership and agreement between individuals across groups. Further, analyses have pitched stakeholder groups against one another in an attempt to understand who prioritises what, and often fails to grasp rationales underlying priorities. A deeper understanding of who prioritises what research areas and why is required to consider applicability of results across contexts and deepen social accountability and transferability. A web-based Q-methodological approach with n =91 participants ( who ) from ten pre-classified stakeholder groups was employed with post-sort interviews ( why ). Sixty-seven Q-set items (Chinese/English languages) were developed from previous research ( what ). Participants were mainly from Taiwan, although international researchers were included. Q-sorting was undertaken in groups or individually, followed by post-sort interviews. Eighty-six participants’ Q-sorts were included in the final analysis. Intercorrelations among Q-sorts were factor-analysed (Centroid method) and rotated analytically (Varimax method). Interviews were thematically analysed. Six Viewpoints with eigenvalues exceeding 1 were identified (range = 3.55–10.34; 42% total variance; 35/67 topics), mapping high/low priorities for research foci: Workplace teaching and learning; Patient dignity and healthcare safety; Professionalism and healthcare professionals’ development; Medical ethics and moral development; Healthcare professionals’ retention and success; Preparing for clinical practice. Eighteen rationales for prioritisation were identified: impact, organisational culture and deficit of educators/practitioners were most highly cited. Each Viewpoint, held by multiple stakeholders, comprised a unique set of topic-groupings, target study participants, beneficiaries and rationales. The two most prolific Viewpoints represent how different stakeholder groups highlight key complementary perspectives of healthcare professions’ education in the workplace (efficacy of teaching/learning practices, application of knowledge/values). By illuminating the detail around each Viewpoint, and presenting an holistic description of the who-what-why in research priority setting, others wishing to undertake such an exercise can more easily identify how stakeholder Viewpoints and their epistemic beliefs can help shape healthcare professions’ research agendas more generally.