'Challenges in experiential learning during transition to clinical practice: A comparative analysis of reflective writing assignments during general practice, paediatrics and psychiatry clerkships'.

INTRODUCTION: This study explored the reflective writing (RW) of senior medical students across a co-ordinated reflection education programme in General Practice, Paediatrics and Psychiatry clerkships during their transition to clinical clerkships. The study compared RW themes from within and across three clerkships in order to understand the influence clerkships had on experiential learning and developing professional identity. METHODS: All medical students in their penultimate year were invited to participate in the study. 135 reflection assignments were analysed. A qualitative thematic analysis of students' RW was performed. An inductive approach was used and data saturation was achieved. RESULTS: Clerkship specific themes were the intimacy of the experience in General Practice, the powerlessness students felt and the challenge of delivering family centred care in Paediatrics and the sense of perceived risk in Psychiatry. Common themes across the three clerkships were of emotional struggles in developing a professional identity. CONCLUSION: There is an educational need for developmental space for students during General Practice, greater focus on preparing students for relationship building during Paediatrics and addressing stigma and personal safety issues in students during the Psychiatry clerkships. Across clerkships there is a need for better use of evidence based pedagogies to support emotional development.

A Best Evidence in Medical Education systematic review to determine the most effective teaching methods that develop reflection in medical students: BEME Guide No. 51.

INTRODUCTION: Reflection is thought to be an essential skill for physicians. Although much has been written about it, there is little concurrence about how to best teach reflection in medical education. The aim of this review was to determine: (i) which educational interventions are being used to develop reflection, (ii) how is reflection being assessed, and (iii) what are the most effective interventions. METHODS: Inclusion criteria comprised: (i) undergraduate medical students, (ii) a teaching intervention to develop reflection, and (iii) assessment of the intervention. A review protocol was developed and nine databases were searched. Screening, data extraction, and analysis procedures were performed in duplicate. Due to the heterogeneity of studies, a narrative synthesis approach was performed for the study analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The interventions in these studies had at least of two of the following components related to reflection: (i) introduction, (ii) trigger, (iii) writing, (iv) guidelines, (v) small group discussion, (vi) tutor and (vii) feedback. Three validated rubrics were used to assess reflective writing in these studies. CONCLUSIONS: The strongest evidence from studies in this review indicates that guidelines for, and feedback on, reflective writing improve student reflection.

Risk prediction models to predict emergency hospital admission in community-dwelling adults: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Risk prediction models have been developed to identify those at increased risk for emergency admissions, which could facilitate targeted interventions in primary care to prevent these events. OBJECTIVE: Systematic review of validated risk prediction models for predicting emergency hospital admissions in community-dwelling adults. METHODS: A systematic literature review and narrative analysis was conducted. Inclusion criteria were as follows; POPULATION: community-dwelling adults (aged 18 years and above); Risk: risk prediction models, not contingent on an index hospital admission, with a derivation and ≥1 validation cohort; PRIMARY OUTCOME: emergency hospital admission (defined as unplanned overnight stay in hospital); STUDY DESIGN: retrospective or prospective cohort studies. RESULTS: Of 18,983 records reviewed, 27 unique risk prediction models met the inclusion criteria. Eleven were developed in the United States, 11 in the United Kingdom, 3 in Italy, 1 in Spain, and 1 in Canada. Nine models were derived using self-report data, and the remainder (n=18) used routine administrative or clinical record data. Total study sample sizes ranged from 96 to 4.7 million participants. Predictor variables most frequently included in models were: (1) named medical diagnoses (n=23); (2) age (n=23); (3) prior emergency admission (n=22); and (4) sex (n=18). Eleven models included nonmedical factors, such as functional status and social supports. Regarding predictive accuracy, models developed using administrative or clinical record data tended to perform better than those developed using self-report data (c statistics 0.63-0.83 vs. 0.61-0.74, respectively). Six models reported c statistics of >0.8, indicating good performance. All 6 included variables for prior health care utilization, multimorbidity or polypharmacy, and named medical diagnoses or prescribed medications. Three predicted admissions regarded as being ambulatory care sensitive. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that risk models developed using administrative or clinical record data tend to perform better. In applying a risk prediction model to a new population, careful consideration needs to be given to the purpose of its use and local factors.