Through a Tainted Lens: A Qualitatve Study of Medical Learners' Thinking About Patient 'Deservingness' of Health Advocacy.

Introduction: While health advocacy is a key component of many competency frameworks, mounting evidence suggests that learners do not see it as core to their learning and future practice. When learners do advocate for their patients, they characterize this work as 'going above and beyond' for a select few patients. When they think about advocacy in this way, learners choose who deserves their efforts. For educators and policymakers to support learners in making these decisions thoughtfully and ethically, we must first understand how they are currently thinking about patient deservingness. Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews with 29 undergraduate and postgraduate medical learners, across multiple sites and disciplines, to discuss their experiences of and decision-making about health advocacy. We then carried out a thematic analysis to understand how learners decided when and for whom to advocate. Stemming from initial inductive coding, we then developed a deductive coding framework, based in existing theory conceptualizing 'deservingness.' Results: Learners saw their patients as deserving of advocacy if they believed that the patient: was not responsible for their condition, was more in need of support than others, had a positive attitude, was working to improve their health, and shared similarities to the learner. Learners noted the tensions inherent in, and discomfort with, their own thinking about patient deservingness. Discussion: Learners' decisions about advocacy deservingness are rooted in their preconceptions about the patient. Explicit curriculum and conversations about advocacy decisions are needed to support learners in making advocacy decisions equitably.

Grappling with key questions about assessment of the Health Advocate role.

Introduction: Although the CanMEDS framework sets the standard for Canadian training, health advocacy competence does not appear to factor heavily into high stakes assessment decisions. Without forces motivating uptake, there is little movement by educational programs to integrate robust advocacy teaching and assessment practices. However, by adopting CanMEDS, the Canadian medical education community endorses that advocacy is required for competent medical practice. It's time to back up that endorsement with meaningful action. Our purpose was to aid this work by answering the key questions that continue to challenge training for this intrinsic physician role. Methods: We used a critical review methodology to both examine literature relevant to the complexities impeding robust advocacy assessment, and develop recommendations. Our review moved iteratively through five phases: focusing the question, searching the literature, appraising and selecting sources, and analyzing results. Results: Improving advocacy training relies, in part, on the medical education community developing a shared vision of the Health Advocate (HA) role, designing, implementing, and integrating developmentally appropriate curricula, and considering ethical implications of assessing a role that may be risky to enact. Conclusion: Changes to assessment could be a key driver of curricular change for the HA role, provided implementation timelines and resources are sufficient to make necessary changes meaningful. To truly be meaningful, however, advocacy first needs to be perceived as valuable. Our recommendations are intended as a roadmap for transforming advocacy from a theoretical and aspirational value into one viewed as having both practical relevance and consequential implications.

Introduction: Bien que le référentiel CanMEDS établisse les normes en matière de formation et de pratique médicale au Canada, la compétence de promotion de la santé (PS) ne semble pas peser lourd aux étapes décisives du continuum de la formation médicale. En l'absence de facteurs incitatifs, les programmes de formation sont peu enclins à intégrer des pratiques solides d'enseignement et d'évaluation en matière de PS. Un système de soins de santé marqué par l'iniquité appelle pourtant des efforts de sensibilisation. En adoptant le référentiel CanMEDS, le milieu canadien de l'éducation médicale a reconnu que la PS est nécessaire à la pratique compétente de la médecine. Il est temps que cet engagement soit traduit en actions concrètes. Méthodes: Employant une méthode d'analyse critique, nous avons examiné les écrits qui peuvent éclairer les obstacles à l'évaluation sérieuse de la PS et avons formulé des recommandations. L'examen a été effectué de manière itérative en cinq étapes : définition de la question de recherche, recherche documentaire, évaluation et sélection des sources, et analyse des résultats. Résultats: L'amélioration de la formation en matière de PS suppose, entre autres, que le milieu de l'éducation médicale s'attèle aux enjeux clés suivants : 1) l'élaborer une vision commune de la PS, 2) concevoir, mettre en œuvre et intégrer des programmes d'études évolutifs et 3) considérer les répercussions éthiques de l'évaluation d'un rôle qui comporte une part de risque. Conclusion: Le manque de visibilité et d'attention accordées à la PS dans la formation amène de nombreux apprenants à se demander si leur compétence en la matière compte vraiment. Nous estimons que la promotion de la santé est au cœur des soins centrés sur le patient. Nous lançons donc un appel à redoubler nos efforts collectifs pour faire passer la PS du statut de simple aspiration et de valeur théorique à celui d'une valeur ayant une pertinence et des incidences concrètes.

Development, Implementation, and Meta-Evaluation of a National Approach to Programmatic Assessment in Canadian Family Medicine Residency Training.

The growing international adoption of competency-based medical education has created a desire for descriptions of innovative assessment approaches that generate appropriate and sufficient information to allow for informed, defensible decisions about learner progress. In this article, the authors provide an overview of the development and implementation of the approach to programmatic assessment in postgraduate family medicine training programs in Canada, called Continuous Reflective Assessment for Training (CRAFT). CRAFT is a principles-guided, high-level approach to workplace-based assessment that was intentionally designed to be adaptable to local contexts, including size of program, resources available, and structural enablers and barriers. CRAFT has been implemented in all 17 Canadian family medicine residency programs, with each program taking advantage of the high-level nature of the CRAFT guidelines to create bespoke assessment processes and tools appropriate for their local contexts. Similarities and differences in CRAFT implementation between 5 different family medicine residency training programs, representing both English- and French-language programs from both Western and Eastern Canada, are described. Despite the intentional flexibility of the CRAFT guidelines, notable similarities in assessment processes and procedures across the 5 programs were seen. A meta-evaluation of findings from programs that have published evaluation information supports the value of CRAFT as an effective approach to programmatic assessment. While CRAFT is currently in place in family medicine residency programs in Canada, given its adaptability to different contexts as well as promising evaluation data, the CRAFT approach shows promise for application in other training environments.

Health advocacy among medical learners: Unpacking contextual barriers and affordances.

INTRODUCTION: Learners and physicians are expected to practice as health advocates in Canadian contexts, but they rarely feel competent to practice this critical role when they complete their training. This is in part because advocacy is seen as "going above and beyond" routine practice and pushing the boundaries of systems that are resistant to change. Medical learning contexts are rife with barriers to learning about and practicing advocacy, and there is now a need to understand how contexts impact advocacy. METHODS: Using constructivist grounded theory study, we generated data through individual and group interviews with medical learners to explore the barriers and facilitators to advocacy in a variety of learning/practice contexts. We used purposeful and theoretical sampling to ensure that diverse learning contexts and learners who had different views on advocacy were represented. We constructed a theoretical model to understand advocacy decision-making through cycles of initial, focused and theoretical coding, using constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: Learners' thinking about health advocacy was framed by their own unique knowledge and beliefs, as well as their institutional and organisational contexts. With these influences in mind, learners made decisions about when to advocate within a local decision-making context, guided by affordances and barriers to advocacy involved in their perceptions of the patient, their own social position, resources available and social norms. CONCLUSIONS: This framework highlights critical aspects of context that influence learners' ability to learn about and practice as health advocates. If we are to adequately prepare learners for this important work, we must address aspects of their learning and practice contexts that make this work daunting, and we offer learners the tools required to intervene in contexts that do not support their efforts.

Making sense of adaptive expertise for frontline clinical educators: a scoping review of definitions and strategies.

Adaptive expertise has been promoted as an emerging model of expertise in health professions education in response to the inherent complexities of patient care; however, as the concept increasingly influences the structure of professional training and practice, it creates the potential for misunderstandings of the definition and implications of adaptive expertise. To foster a common understanding of the concept, we conducted a scoping review to explore how adaptive expertise has been discussed within health professions education literature. Five databases-MedLine, PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL, and PsycINFO-were searched using the exact term "adaptive expertise", producing 212 unique articles. Fifty-eight articles met inclusion criteria. In the included articles, authors discussed the conceptual implications of adaptive expertise for health professions education, strategies for training for adaptive expertise, and research findings aimed at supporting the development of adaptive expertise or utilizing adaptive expertise as a theoretical framework. The goal of this scoping review is to establish a resource for frontline educators tasked with fostering the development of adaptive expertise in learners through education initiatives. A common understanding of adaptive expertise is essential to ensuring effective implementation in training programs.

Learner conceptions of health advocacy: 'Going above & beyond' or 'kind of an expectation'.

CONTEXT: Health advocacy is a core component of physician competency frameworks. However, advocacy has lacked a clear definition and is understood and enacted variably across contexts. Due to their mobility across contexts, learners are uniquely positioned to provide insight into the tensions that have made this role so difficult to define, but that may be central to this role. The purpose of this study was to map the tensions and contours in conceptions of health advocacy among learners across a variety of learning contexts. METHODS: We used constructivist grounded theory and interviewed nine medical students and twenty residents in family, paediatric and internal medicine from across our university's distributed programmes. Data were analysed concurrently using open, focussed and theoretical coding to establish themes and relationships between themes. RESULTS: Learners understood health advocacy in two overlapping but distinct ways: as a set of behaviours and as a sense of 'going above and beyond', through additional effort, time or risk. These two conceptions overlapped and were often in tension. 'Going above and beyond' sometimes aligned with identifiable advocacy behaviours; at other times, 'going above and beyond' did not align with definitions of health advocacy in competency frameworks and aligned more closely with 'patient-centred care'. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that learners perceive that there are important elements of health advocacy that cannot be captured in universal behaviours that apply across contexts. 'Going above and beyond' describes a sense of grappling with sociocultural barriers to patient-centred care and striving towards better systems and better care for individuals. This more abstract and contextually bound notion of health advocacy may not lend itself easily to definition in competency frameworks and thus adds challenges to both teaching and assessment.