Creation of an asynchronous faculty development curriculum on well-written narrative assessments that avoid bias.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic in parallel with concerns about bias in grading resulted in many medical schools adopting pass/fail clinical grading and relying solely on narrative assessments. However, narratives often contain bias and lack specificity. The purpose of this project was to develop asynchronous faculty development to rapidly educate/re-educate > 2000 clinical faculty spread across geographic sites and clinical disciplines on components of a well-written narrative and methods to minimize bias in the assessment of students. METHODS: We describe creation, implementation, and pilot data outcomes for an asynchronous faculty development curriculum created by a committee of volunteer learners and faculty. After reviewing the literature on the presence and impact of bias in clinical rotations and ways to mitigate bias in written narrative assessments, the committee developed a web-based curriculum using multimedia learning theory and principles of adult learning. Just-in-time supplemental materials accompanied the curriculum. The Dean added completion of the module by 90% of clinical faculty to the department chairperson's annual education metric. Module completion was tracked in a learning management system, including time spent in the module and the answer to a single text entry question about intended changes in behavior. Thematic analysis of the text entry question with grounded theory and inductive processing was used to define themes of how faculty anticipate future teaching and assessment as a result of this curricula. OUTCOMES: Between January 1, 2021, and December 1, 2021, 2166 individuals completed the online module; 1820 spent between 5 and 90 min on the module, with a median time of 17 min and an average time of 20.2 min. 15/16 clinical departments achieved completion by 90% or more faculty. Major themes included: changing the wording of future narratives, changing content in future narratives, and focusing on efforts to change how faculty teach and lead teams, including efforts to minimize bias. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a faculty development curriculum on mitigating bias in written narratives with high rates of faculty participation. Inclusion of this module as part of the chair's education performance metric likely impacted participation. Nevertheless, time spent in the module suggests that faculty engaged with the material. Other institutions could easily adapt this curriculum with provided materials.

Kinship Care and Foster Care: A Comparison of Out-of-Home Placement From the Perspective of Child Abuse Experts in North Carolina.

BACKGROUND Children may be placed in either kinship or foster care, forms of out-of-home placement (OHP), if maltreatment is suspected. The American Academy of Pediatrics has identified them as children with special health needs requiring elevated care. While North Carolina has increased support for foster care, it is unclear whether similar support exists for kinship care. Child abuse medical providers (CAMPs) were interviewed regarding their understanding and assessment of the state of the kinship care system in North Carolina, and how it can be improved.METHODS CAMPs were individually interviewed using a semi-structured, open-ended question guide to assess their perspectives on kinship versus foster care in North Carolina. Data were coded, and the analysis was conducted in an inductive manner, allowing themes and then recommendations to emerge from interviews.RESULTS The following three themes were identified: 1) providers have a foundational understanding of the kinship care system, marked by knowledge gaps; 2) children in kinship care and foster care have equivalent, elevated health needs, but children in kinship care do not receive the same level of care; 3) individual and structural changes have to be made to the interprofessional teams working within the OHP system.LIMITATIONS The study sample was small, including eight CAMPs who had relatively homogenous demographic characteristics. CAMPs typically see the worst cases of maltreatment, which may bias responses. Additionally, the majority of children in kinship care are unknown to CAMPs and may not be fully represented in responses.CONCLUSION CAMPs' responses were summarized into a set of recommendations targeting four different components of the OHP team: the general interprofessional team, policymakers and state leaders, medical providers, and social workers.

Improving Timeliness of Medical Evaluations for Children Entering Foster Care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends children in foster care (FC) have an initial medical evaluation within 3 days of custody initiation; however, this vulnerable population often suffers from disjointed care. Our aim was to improve the mean time to initial foster care evaluation (TIE) from 32 to <7 days within 12 months for children in FC in Durham County, North Carolina. METHODS: This study was a time series, quality improvement project used to target interventions within an academic clinic and a community agency. Interventions were tested through multiple plan-do-study-act cycles. Control charts of the primary outcome, the TIE, were constructed. Charts were annotated with the dates of interventions, including workshops, performance feedback, integration of state forms, identification of appointments, development of an urgent appointment pathway, and empowerment of the scheduler. RESULTS: The mean TIE improved from 32 to 9 days within 12 months. Significant improvement in the following 2 process measures contributed to this: the time from custody initiation to the referral date improved from an average of 10 to 3 days, and the time from referral date to the initial evaluation improved from an average of 22 to 6 days. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement interventions and increased collaboration between medical and child welfare agencies can result in significant improvement of the TIE. However, despite improvement efforts, challenges remain in meeting the AAP 3-day TIE recommendation. We recommend further assessment of the AAP guideline as it relates to implementation feasibility and health outcomes of children in FC.

A Tablet-Based Educational Tool: Toward More Comprehensive Pediatric Patient Education.

There is a paucity of data on the impact of mobile technology on physician-led education in the pediatric population. We performed a prospective pilot study in a pediatric diabetes clinic to evaluate the impact of tablet-based patient education. A total of 106 patients and caregivers completed postclinic surveys, 64 (60%) in the intervention group and 42 (40%) in the control group. The majority of the intervention group patients (86%) liked tablet use and felt it was better or similar (99%) to baseline. Moreover, a majority receiving tablet-based education perceived an increase in diabetes knowledge (57%) compared with baseline (39%), though the difference did not reach statistical significance ( P = .059). Those who received tablet-based education felt they were educated on more diabetes-related topics. As the use of mobile technology in medicine grows, additional research is needed to compare mobile technology with traditional methods in providing education to the pediatric population.

A meaningful MESS (Medical Education Scholarship Support).

BACKGROUND: Graduate medical education faculty bear the responsibility of demonstrating active research and scholarship; however, faculty who choose education-focused careers may face unique obstacles related to the lack of promotion tracks, funding, career options, and research opportunities. Our objective was to address education research and scholarship barriers by providing a collaborative peer-mentoring environment and improve the production of research and scholarly outputs. METHODS: We describe a Medical Education Scholarship Support (MESS) group created in 2013. MESS is an interprofessional, multidisciplinary peer-mentoring education research community that now spans multiple institutions. This group meets monthly to address education research and scholarship challenges. Through this process, we develop new knowledge, research, and scholarly products, in addition to meaningful collaborations. RESULTS: MESS originated with eight founding members, all of whom still actively participate. MESS has proven to be a sustainable unfunded local community of practice, encouraging faculty to pursue health professions education (HPE) careers and fostering scholarship. We have met our original objectives that involved maintaining 100% participant retention; developing increased knowledge in at least seven content areas; and contributing to the development of 13 peer-reviewed publications, eight professional presentations, one Masters of Education project, and one educational curriculum. DISCUSSION: The number of individuals engaged in HPE research continues to rise. The MESS model could be adapted for use at other institutions, thereby reducing barriers HPE researchers face, providing an effective framework for trainees interested in education-focused careers, and having a broader impact on the education research landscape.

Milestone-Based Assessments Are Superior to Likert-Type Assessments in Illustrating Trainee Progression.

BACKGROUND: The Pediatrics Milestone Project uses behavioral anchors, narrative descriptions of observable behaviors, to describe learner progression through the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies. Starting June 2014, pediatrics programs were required to submit milestone reports for their trainees semiannually. Likert-type scale assessment tools were not designed to inform milestone reporting, creating a challenge for Clinical Competency Committees. OBJECTIVE: To determine if milestone-based assessments better stratify trainees by training level compared to Likert-type assessments. METHODS: We compared assessment results for 3 subcompetencies after changing from a 5-point Likert scale to milestone-based behavioral anchors in July 2013. Program leadership evaluated the new system by (1) comparing PGY-1 mean scores on Likert-type versus milestone-based assessments; and (2) comparing mean scores on the Likert-type versus milestone-based assessments across PGY levels. RESULTS: Mean scores for PGY-1 residents were significantly higher on the prior year's Likert-type assessments than milestone-based assessments for all 3 subcompetencies (P < .01). Stratification by PGY level was not observed with Likert-type assessments (eg, interpersonal and communication skills 1 [ICS1] mean score for PGY-1, 3.99 versus PGY-3, 3.98; P  =  .98). In contrast, milestone-based assessments demonstrated stratification by PGY level (eg, the ICS1 mean score was 3.06 for PGY-1, 3.83 for PGY-2, and 3.99 for PGY-3; P < .01 for PGY-1 versus PGY-3). Significantly different means by trainee level were noted across 21 subcompetencies on milestone-based assessments (P < .01 for PGY-1 versus PGY-3). CONCLUSIONS: Initial results indicate milestone-based assessments stratify trainee performance by level better than Likert-type assessments. Average PGY-level scores from milestone-based assessments may ultimately provide guidance for determining whether trainees are progressing at the expected pace.

Can Tablet Computers Enhance Faculty Teaching?

BACKGROUND: Learner benefits of tablet computer use have been demonstrated, yet there is little evidence regarding faculty tablet use for teaching. OBJECTIVE: Our study sought to determine if supplying faculty with tablet computers and peer mentoring provided benefits to learners and faculty beyond that of non-tablet-based teaching modalities. METHODS: We provided faculty with tablet computers and three 2-hour peer-mentoring workshops on tablet-based teaching. Faculty used tablets to teach, in addition to their current, non-tablet-based methods. Presurveys, postsurveys, and monthly faculty surveys assessed feasibility, utilization, and comparisons to current modalities. Learner surveys assessed perceived effectiveness and comparisons to current modalities. All feedback received from open-ended questions was reviewed by the authors and organized into categories. RESULTS: Of 15 eligible faculty, 14 participated. Each participant attended at least 2 of the 3 workshops, with 10 to 12 participants at each workshop. All participants found the workshops useful, and reported that the new tablet-based teaching modality added value beyond that of current teaching methods. Respondents developed the following tablet-based outputs: presentations, photo galleries, evaluation tools, and online modules. Of the outputs, 60% were used in the ambulatory clinics, 33% in intensive care unit bedside teaching rounds, and 7% in inpatient medical unit bedside teaching rounds. Learners reported that common benefits of tablet computers were: improved access/convenience (41%), improved interactive learning (38%), and improved bedside teaching and patient care (13%). A common barrier faculty identified was inconsistent wireless access (14%), while no barriers were identified by the majority of learners. CONCLUSIONS: Providing faculty with tablet computers and having peer-mentoring workshops to discuss their use was feasible and added value.

Using an innovative curriculum evaluation tool to inform program improvement: the clinical skills fair.

BACKGROUND: Program evaluation is important for assessing the effectiveness of the residency curriculum. Limited resources are available, however, and curriculum evaluation processes must be sustainable and well integrated into program improvement efforts. INTERVENTION: We describe the pediatric Clinical Skills Fair, an innovative method for evaluating the effectiveness of residency curriculum through assessment of trainees in 2 domains: medical knowledge/patient care and procedure. Each year from 2008 to 2011, interns completed the Clinical Skills Fair as rising interns in postgraduate year (PGY)-1 (R1s) and again at the end of the year, as rising residents in PGY-2 (R2s). Trainees completed the Clinical Skills Fair at the beginning and end of the intern year for each cohort to assess how well the curriculum prepared them to meet the intern goals and objectives. RESULTS: Participants were 48 R1s and 47 R2s. In the medical knowledge/patient care domain, intern scores improved from 48% to 65% correct (P < .001). Significant improvement was demonstrated in the following subdomains: jaundice (41% to 65% correct; P < .001), fever (67% to 94% correct; P < .001), and asthma (43% to 62% correct; P  =  .002). No significant change was noted within the arrhythmia subdomain. There was significant improvement in the procedure domain for all interns (χ(2)  =  32.82, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The Clinical Skills Fair is a readily implemented and sustainable method for our residency program curriculum assessment. Its feasibility may allow other programs to assess their curriculum and track the impact of programmatic changes; it may be particularly useful for program evaluation committees.

Invisible children.

A series of severe child abuse cases in the state, all involving children who were reportedly homeschooled, are cause for concern. We review 4 such cases and the regulations regarding homeschooling in the state of North Carolina, exploring potential deficits in the system and suggesting ways of addressing them.

Do pediatric residents prefer interactive learning? Educational challenges in the duty hours era.

BACKGROUND: The volume of information that physicians must learn is increasing; yet, trainee educational time is limited. Many experts propose using trainees' learning preferences to guide teaching. However, data regarding predominant learning preferences within pediatrics are limited. AIM: Identify predominant learning preferences among pediatric residents in a Residency Training Program. METHODS: The Visual-Aural-Read/Write-Kinesthetic (VARK) questionnaire and Kolb Learning Style Inventory (LSI) were administered anonymously to 50 pediatric residents. RESULTS: Learning style assessments were completed by 50 pediatric residents. Residents were significantly more likely to be accommodating on the Kolb LSI, which is consistent with an interactive learning preference (p < 0.01); 30% demonstrated a multimodal preference on the Kolb LSI (Figure 1). VARK assessments demonstrated that 45 (90%) respondents were kinesthetic, which is also consistent with a significant preference for interactive learning (p < 0.01). Forty (80%) were found to be multimodal on the VARK (Figure 1). There was no association between learning preference and the residents' anticipated career choice or level of training. CONCLUSIONS: The predominant learning preferences among a cohort of pediatric residents from a single training program were consistent with a preference for interactive learning, suggesting that some trainees may benefit from supplementation of educational curricula with additional interactive experiences. Continued investigation is needed in this area to assess the effectiveness of adapting teaching techniques to individual learning preferences.