Digital clinical placements: Student perspectives and preparedness for placements.

BACKGROUND: In May 2020, first-year students at Imperial College School of Medicine attended a 'digital hospital placement'. Occurring in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, this replaced their first planned hospital placement. The authors analysed student experiences to understand how a digital hospital placement impacted self-perceived clinical and professional development and whether it improved preparedness for face-to-face hospital placements. METHODS: Three hundred ten students participated in this week-long digital placement, which integrated clinical skills, communication and professional behaviour domains. It aimed to prepare students for safe participation in clinical environments. Resources included self-directed and peer learning, virtual simulations (Oxford Medical Simulation) and staff-led debriefing. Surveys were administered after the digital placement and after students' first face-to-face placement to collect quantitative and qualitative data. A reflexive thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Eighty-three and twenty-nine students completed the postdigital and post-face-to-face placement evaluation respectively. Quantitative results indicated a high self-rated achievement of learning objectives and enthusiasm for digital placements; 83% of respondents supported digital simulations as part of regular medical education. Qualitative analysis identified three superordinate themes: (1) domain integration in digital placements helped students feel better prepared; (2) digital experiential learning is ideally suited to early clinical learning; and (3) virtual placements are a compliment, not an alternative, to face-to-face placements. CONCLUSION: Digital placements are a promising means of supporting the challenging transition from classroom learner to clinical learner. They provide a feasible and scalable option for building student confidence and improving preparedness.

Identity Development in Disorientating Times: the Experiences of Medical Students During COVID-19.

Introduction: Professional identity development is a central aim of medical education, which has been disrupted during COVID-19. Yet, no research has qualitatively explored COVID-19's impact across institutions or countries on medical students' identities. Kegan proposes a cognitive model of identity development, where 'disorientating dilemmas' prompt student development. Given the potential of COVID-related disruption to generate disorientating dilemmas, the authors investigated the ways in which COVID-19 influenced students' identity development. Methods: The authors conducted an international qualitative study with second year medical students from Imperial College London, and third year students from Melbourne Medical School. Six focus groups occurred 2020-2021, with three to six students per group. Authors analysed data using reflexive thematic analysis, applying Kegan's model as a sensitising theoretical lens. Results: COVID-19 has resulted in a loss of clinical exposure, loss of professional relationships, and a shift in public perception of physicians. Loss of exposure to clinical practice removed the external validation from patients and seniors many students depended on for identity development. Students' experiences encouraged them to assume the responsibilities of the profession and the communities they served, in the face of conflicting demands and risk. Acknowledging and actioning this responsibility facilitated identity development as a socially responsible advocate. Conclusions: Educators should consider adapting medical education to support students through Kegan's stages of development. Measures to foster relationships between students, patients, and staff are likely necessary. Formal curricula provisions, such as spaces for reflection and opportunities for social responsibility, may aid students in resolving the conflict many have recently experienced. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-022-01592-z.

Attitudes towards Trusting Artificial Intelligence Insights and Factors to Prevent the Passive Adherence of GPs: A Pilot Study.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems could improve system efficiency by supporting clinicians in making appropriate referrals. However, they are imperfect by nature and misdiagnoses, if not correctly identified, can have consequences for patient care. In this paper, findings from an online survey are presented to understand the aptitude of GPs (n = 50) in appropriately trusting or not trusting the output of a fictitious AI-based decision support tool when assessing skin lesions, and to identify which individual characteristics could make GPs less prone to adhere to erroneous diagnostics results. The findings suggest that, when the AI was correct, the GPs' ability to correctly diagnose a skin lesion significantly improved after receiving correct AI information, from 73.6% to 86.8% (X2 (1, N = 50) = 21.787, p < 0.001), with significant effects for both the benign (X2 (1, N = 50) = 21, p < 0.001) and malignant cases (X2 (1, N = 50) = 4.654, p = 0.031). However, when the AI provided erroneous information, only 10% of the GPs were able to correctly disagree with the indication of the AI in terms of diagnosis (d-AIW M: 0.12, SD: 0.37), and only 14% of participants were able to correctly decide the management plan despite the AI insights (d-AIW M:0.12, SD: 0.32). The analysis of the difference between groups in terms of individual characteristics suggested that GPs with domain knowledge in dermatology were better at rejecting the wrong insights from AI.

An online discussion between students and teachers: a way forward for meaningful teacher feedback?

BACKGROUND: Student evaluation is an essential component in feedback processes in faculty and learner development. Ease of use and low cost have made paper evaluation forms a popular method within teaching programmes, but they are often seen as a formality, offering variable value towards the improvement of teaching. Students report poor motivation to engage with existing feedback tools whilst teachers describe receiving vague, contradicting, or irrelevant information. We believe that feedback for teachers needs to be a two-way process, similar to feedback for students, for it to be effective. An online feedback tool has been implemented for third-year medical students from Imperial College London to promote open discussion between teachers and students. The feedback tool is accessible throughout students' clinical attachment with the option of maintaining anonymity. We aim to explore the benefits and challenges of this online feedback tool and assess its value as a method for teacher feedback. METHODS: Qualitative data was obtained from both volunteer third-year medical students of Imperial College London and Clinical Teaching Fellows using three focus groups and a questionnaire. Data was analysed through iterative coding and thematic analysis to provide over-arching analytical themes. RESULTS: Twenty-nine students trialled this feedback tool with 17 responding to the evaluative questionnaire. Four over-arching themes were identified: reasons for poor participation with traditional feedback tools; student motivators to engage with 'open feedback'; evaluative benefits from open feedback; concerns and barriers with open feedback. CONCLUSION: This feedback tool provides a platform for two-way feedback by encouraging open, transparent discussion between teachers and learners. It gives a unique insight into both teachers and peers' perspectives. Students engage better when their responses are acknowledged by the teachers. We elaborate on the benefits and challenges of public open feedback and approaches to consider in addressing the self-censorship of critical comments.

National inter-rater agreement of standardised simulated-patient-based assessments.

PURPOSE: The forthcoming UK Medical Licensing Assessment will require all medical schools in the UK to ensure that their students pass an appropriately designed Clinical and Professional Skills Assessment (CPSA) prior to graduation and registration with a licence to practice medicine. The requirements for the CPSA will be set by the General Medical Council, but individual medical schools will be responsible for implementing their own assessments. It is therefore important that assessors from different medical schools across the UK agree on what standard of performance constitutes a fail, pass or good grade. METHODS: We used an experimental video-based, single-blinded, randomised, internet-based design. We created videos of simulated student performances of a clinical examination at four scripted standards: clear fail (CF), borderline (BD), clear pass (CPX) and good (GD). Assessors from ten regions across the UK were randomly assigned to watch five videos in 12 different combinations and asked to give competence domain scores and an overall global grade for each simulated candidate. The inter-rater agreement as measured by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) based on a two-way random-effects model for absolute agreement was calculated for the total domain scores. RESULTS: 120 assessors enrolled in the study, with 98 eligible for analysis. The ICC was 0.93 (95% CI 0.81-0.99). The mean percentage agreement with the scripted global grade was 74.4% (range 40.8-96.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The inter-rater agreement amongst assessors across the UK when rating simulated candidates performing at scripted levels is excellent. The level of agreement for the overall global performance level for simulated candidates is also high. These findings suggest that assessors from across the UK viewing the same simulated performances show high levels of agreement of the standards expected of students at a 'clear fail,' 'borderline,' 'clear pass' and 'good' level.