Assessing the quality of clinical teachers: a systematic review of content and quality of questionnaires for assessing clinical teachers.
Keywords
N4i 4: Auto-immunity, transplantation and immunotherapyNCEBP 2: Evaluation of complex medical interventions
NCEBP 3: Implementation Science
NCEBP 4: Quality of hospital and integrated care
NCEBP 5: Health care ethics
NCEBP 3: Implementation Science
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
http://hdl.handle.net/2066/88327Abstract
BACKGROUND: Learning in a clinical environment differs from formal educational settings and provides specific challenges for clinicians who are teachers. Instruments that reflect these challenges are needed to identify the strengths and weaknesses of clinical teachers. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the content, validity, and aims of questionnaires used to assess clinical teachers. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and ERIC from 1976 up to March 2010. REVIEW METHODS: The searches revealed 54 papers on 32 instruments. Data from these papers were documented by independent researchers, using a structured format that included content of the instrument, validation methods, aims of the instrument, and its setting. RESULTS: Aspects covered by the instruments predominantly concerned the use of teaching strategies (included in 30 instruments), supporter role (29), role modeling (27), and feedback (26). Providing opportunities for clinical learning activities was included in 13 instruments. Most studies referred to literature on good clinical teaching, although they failed to provide a clear description of what constitutes a good clinical teacher. Instrument length varied from 1 to 58 items. Except for two instruments, all had to be completed by clerks/residents. Instruments served to provide formative feedback ( instruments) but were also used for resource allocation, promotion, and annual performance review (14 instruments). All but two studies reported on internal consistency and/or reliability; other aspects of validity were examined less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: No instrument covered all relevant aspects of clinical teaching comprehensively. Validation of the instruments was often limited to assessment of internal consistency and reliability. Available instruments for assessing clinical teachers should be used carefully, especially for consequential decisions. There is a need for more valid comprehensive instruments.Date
2010Type
Article / Letter to editorIdentifier
oai:repository.ubn.ru.nl:2066/88327http://hdl.handle.net/2066/88327
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Perspectives of decision-making in requests for euthanasia: A qualitative research among patients, relatives and treating physicians in the NetherlandsDees, M.K.; Vernooij-Dassen, M.J.F.J.; Dekkers, W.J.M.; Elwyn, G.; Vissers, K.C.P.; Weel, C. van (2013)Background: Euthanasia has been legally performed in the Netherlands since 2002. Respect for patient's autonomy is the underpinning ethical principal. However, patients have no right to euthanasia, and physicians have no obligation to provide it. Although over 3000 cases are conducted per year in the Netherlands, there is little known about how decision-making occurs and no guidance to support this difficult aspect of clinical practice. Aim: To explore the decision-making process in cases where patients request euthanasia and understand the different themes relevant to optimise this decision-making process. Design: A qualitative thematic analysis of interviews with patients making explicit requests for euthanasia, most-involved relative(s) and treating physician. Participants/setting: Thirty-two cases, 31 relatives and 28 treating physicians. Settings were patients' and relatives' homes and physicians' offices. Results: Five main themes emerged: (1) initiation of sharing views and values about euthanasia, (2) building relationships as part of the negotiation, (3) fulfilling legal requirements, (4) detailed work of preparing and performing euthanasia and (5) aftercare and closing. Conclusions: A patient's request for euthanasia entails a complex process that demands emotional work by all participants. It is characterised by an intensive period of sharing information, relationship building and negotiation in order to reach agreement. We hypothesise that making decisions about euthanasia demands a proactive approach towards participants' preferences and values regarding end of life, towards the needs of relatives, towards the burden placed on physicians and a careful attention to shared decision-making. Future research should address the communicational skills professionals require for such complex decision-making.
-
Clinical guidelines may need ethical component.Gottgens, W.; Leeuwen, E. van; Smet, P.A.G.M. de; Buitelaar, J.K. (2010)
-
Parents' perspectives on the unforeseen finding of a fetal sex chromosomal aneuploidyPieters, J.J.; Kooper, A.J.A.; Eggink, A.J.; Verhaak, C.M.; Otten, B.J.; Braat, D.D.M.; Smits, A.P.T.; Leeuwen, E. van (2011)OBJECTIVE: To investigate the parental perspectives of being confronted with an unforeseen fetal sex chromosomal aneuploidy (SCA), in light of the fact that this accidental finding is avoidable by rapid aneuploidy detection (RAD). METHODS: Exploratory qualitative interview study. We conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with parents who decided to continue pregnancy after the unforeseen finding of a fetal SCA. RESULTS: The communication of the unforeseen finding of SCA; the informed decision-making process concerning the pregnancy follow-up and the child and its future were the extracted themes. Parents were not prepared to accidental findings in routine prenatal diagnostics. All started an unguided search on the Internet. It is not at all clear whether parents have preference for an RAD test with X and Y probes Parents were satisfied with the post-test professional information they received to make an informed decision, whereas after birth questions still remained to be answered. CONCLUSION: Parents' perspectives may serve as major contributors to research on the question whether or not the X and Y probes should be standard included for purposes of RAD. The fact that RAD has the possibility to avoid accidental findings of SCAs, brings up the question whether any benefits outweigh the potential harms.