Career orientations of medical students: A Q-methodology study.

INTRODUCTION: In pursuing optimal health care, an adequate medical workforce is crucial. However, many countries are struggling with a misalignment of students' specialty preferences and societal needs regarding the future medical workforce. In order to bridge this gap, it is relevant to gain a better understanding of the medical career choice processes. We explored career orientations among medical students in the Netherlands and their implications for future career choices. METHODS: We used Q-methodology, a hybrid qualitative-quantitative method, to explore career orientations of medical students. Medical students from two universities in the Netherlands, varying in year of progression of medical school, ranked 62 statements with regard to importance for their future career choice. Participants explained their ranking in an interview and completed a questionnaire regarding demographics. Using by-person factor analysis we identified groups of individuals with similar orientations. RESULTS: Twenty-four students participated in this study, resulting in three distinct orientations towards future careers: a first career orientation that highly values lifelong self-development; a second that values work-life balance, and a third that was more concerned with achievement and recognition of their work. CONCLUSION: Medical students' career orientations differed in the importance of challenge, work-life balance, and need for recognition. This knowledge can help to design interventions to shift career choices of medical students closer towards future needs in society. Offering career coaching to students that challenges them to explore and prioritise their values, needs and motivations, for example using the materials form this study as a tool, and stimulates them to consider specialties accordingly, could be a promising strategy for guiding students to more long-term satisfying careers.

Unraveling the medical residency selection game.

The diversity of modern society is often not represented in the medical workforce. This might be partly due to selection practices. We need to better understand decision-making processes by selection committees in order to improve selection procedures with regard to diversity. This paper reports on a qualitative study with a socio-constructivist perspective conducted in 2015 that explored how residency selection decision-making occurred within four specialties in two regions in the Netherlands. Data included transcripts of the decision-making meetings and of one-on-one interviews with committee members before and after the group decision-making meetings. Candidates struggled to portray themselves favorably as they had to balance playing by the rules and being authentic; between fitting in and standing out. Although admissions committees had a welcoming stance to diversity, their practices were unintentionally preventing them from hiring underrepresented minority (URM) candidates. While negotiating admissions is difficult for all candidates, it is presumably even more complicated for URM candidates. This seems to be having a negative influence on attaining workforce diversity. Current beliefs, which make committees mistakenly feel they are acting fairly, might actually justify biased practices. Awareness of the role of committee members in these processes is an essential first step.

Organic or organised: an interaction analysis to identify how interactional practices influence participation in group decision meetings for residency selection.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to shed light on interactional practices in real-life selection decision-making meetings. Adequate residency selection is crucial, yet currently, we have little understanding of how the decision-making process takes place in practice. Since having a wide range of perspectives on candidates is assumed to enhance decision-making, our analytical focus will lie on the possibilities for committee members to participate by contributing their perspective. DESIGN: We analysed interaction in seven recorded real-life selection group decision meetings, with explicit attention to participation. SETTING: Selection meetings of four different highly competitive specialties in two Dutch regions. PARTICIPANTS: 54 participants discussed 68 candidates. METHODS: To unravel interactional practices, group discussions were analysed using a hybrid data-driven, iterative analytical approach. We paid explicit attention to phenomena which have effects on participation. Word counts and an inductive qualitative analysis were used to identify existing variations in the current practices. RESULTS: We found a wide variety of practices. We highlight two distinct interactional patterns, which are illustrative of a spectrum of turn-taking practices, interactional norms and conventions in the meetings. Typical for the first pattern-'organised'-is a chairperson who is in control of the topic and turn-taking process, silences between turns and a slow topic development. The second pattern-'organic'-can be recognised by overlapping speech, clearly voiced disagreements and negotiation about the organisation of the discussion. Both interactional patterns influence the availability of information, as they create different types of thresholds for participation. CONCLUSIONS: By deconstructing group decision-making meetings concerning resident selection, we show how structure, interactional norms and conventions affect participation. We identified a spectrum ranging from organic to organised. Both ends have different effects on possibilities for committee members to participate. Awareness of this spectrum might help groups to optimise decision processes by enriching the range of perspectives shared.

Exploring valid and reliable assessment methods for care management education.

Purpose It is assumed that the use of valid and reliable assessment methods can facilitate the development of medical residents' management and leadership competencies. To justify this assertion, the perceptions of an expert panel of health care leaders were explored on assessment methods used for evaluating care management (CM) development in Dutch residency programs. This paper aims to investigate how assessors and trainees value these methods and examine for any inherent benefits or shortcomings when they are applied in practice. Design/methodology/approach A Delphi survey was conducted among members of the platform for medical leadership in The Netherlands. This panel of experts was made up of clinical educators, practitioners and residents interested in CM education. Findings Of the respondents, 40 (55.6 per cent) and 31 (43 per cent) participated in the first and second rounds of the Delphi survey, respectively. The respondents agreed that assessment methods currently being used to measure residents' CM competencies were weak, though feasible for use in many residency programs. Multi-source feedback (MSF, 92.1 per cent), portfolio/e-portfolio (86.8 per cent) and knowledge testing (76.3 per cent) were identified as the most commonly known assessment methods with familiarity rates exceeding 75 per cent. Practical implications The findings suggested that an "assessment framework" comprising MSF, portfolios, individual process improvement projects or self-reflections and observations in clinical practice should be used to measure CM competencies in residents. Originality/value This study reaffirms the need for objective methods to assess CM skills in post-graduate medical education, as there was not a single assessment method that stood out as the best instrument.

Evaluating medical residents as managers of care: a critical appraisal of assessment methods.

INTRODUCTION: The increasing demands for effective and efficient health care delivery systems worldwide have resulted in an expansion of the desired competencies that physicians need to possess upon graduation. Presently, medical residents require additional professional competencies that can prepare them to practice adequately in a continuously changing health care environment. Recent studies show that despite the importance of competency-based training, the development and evaluation of management competencies in residents during residency training is inadequate. The aim of this literature review was to find out which assessment methods are currently being used to evaluate trainees' management competencies and which, if any, of these methods make use of valid and reliable instruments. METHODS: In September 2012, a thorough search of the literature was performed using the PubMed, Cochrane, Embase®, MEDLINE®, and ERIC databases. Additional searches included scanning the references of relevant articles and sifting through the "related topics" displayed by the databases. RESULTS: A total of 25 out of 178 articles were selected for final review. Four broad categories emerged after analysis that best reflected their content: 1) measurement tools used to evaluate the effect of implemented curricular interventions; 2) measurement tools based on recommendations from consensus surveys or conventions; 3) measurement tools for assessing general competencies, which included care-management; and 4) measurement tools focusing exclusively on care-management competencies. CONCLUSION: Little information was found about (validated) assessment tools being used to measure care-management competence in practice. Our findings suggest that a combination of assessment tools should be used when evaluating residents' care-management competencies.