Group concept mapping for health professions education scholarship.

While explicit conceptual models help to inform research, they are left out of much of the health professions education (HPE) literature. One reason may be the limited understanding about how to develop conceptual models with intention and rigor. Group concept mapping (GCM) is a mixed methods conceptualization approach that has been used to develop frameworks for planning and evaluation, but GCM has not been common in HPE. The purpose of this article is to describe GCM in order to make it more accessible for HPE scholars. We recount the origins and evolution of GCM and summarize its core features: GCM can combine multiple stakeholder perspectives in a systematic and inclusive manner to generate explicit conceptual models. Based on the literature and prior experience using GCM, we detail seven steps in GCM: (1) brainstorming ideas to a specific "focus prompt," (2) preparing ideas by removing duplicates and editing for consistency, (3) sorting ideas according to conceptual similarity, (4) generating the point map through quantitative analysis, (5) interpreting cluster map options, (6) summarizing the final concept map, and (7) reporting and using the map. We provide illustrative examples from HPE studies and compare GCM to other conceptualization methods. GCM has great potential to add to the myriad of methodologies open to HPE researchers. Its alignment with principles of diversity and inclusivity, as well as the need to be systematic in applying theoretical and conceptual frameworks to practice, make it a method well suited for the complexities of contemporary HPE scholarship.

Blind spots in medical education - International perspectives.

BACKGROUND: All individuals and groups have blind spots that can create problems if unaddressed. The goal of this study was to examine blind spots in medical education from international perspectives. METHODS: From December 2022 to March 2023, we distributed an electronic survey through international networks of medical students, postgraduate trainees, and medical educators. Respondents named blind spots affecting their medical education system and then rated nine blind spot domains from a study of U.S. medical education along five-point Likert-type scales (1 = much less attention needed; 5 = much more attention needed). We tested for differences between blind spot ratings by respondent groups. We also analyzed the blind spots that respondents identified to determine those not previously described and performed content analysis on open-ended responses about blind spot domains. RESULTS: There were 356 respondents from 88 countries, including 127 (44%) educators, 80 (28%) medical students, and 33 (11%) postgraduate trainees. At least 80% of respondents rated each blind spot domain as needing 'more' or 'much more' attention; the highest was 88% for 'Patient perspectives and voices that are not heard, valued, or understood.' In analyses by gender, role in medical education, World Bank country income level, and region, a mean difference of 0.5 was seen in only five of the possible 279 statistical comparisons. Of 885 blind spots documented, new blind spot areas related to issues that crossed national boundaries (e.g. international standards) and the sufficiency of resources to support medical education. Comments about the nine blind spot domains illustrated that cultural, health system, and governmental elements influenced how blind spots are manifested across different settings. DISCUSSION: There may be general agreement throughout the world about blind spots in medical education that deserve more attention. This could establish a basis for coordinated international effort to allocate resources and tailor interventions that advance medical education.

Examining the WFME Recognition Programme at 10 years.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, the World Federation for Medical Education (WFME) evaluated and formally recognized the first agency in its Recognition Programme (RP). The RP was developed to review accrediting authorities in response to a 2010 policy by the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG) to require international medical graduates (IMGs) seeking to practice in the U.S. to graduate from an appropriately accredited medical school. By the end of 2022, WFME had recognized 33 accrediting bodies and received applications from another 16, which accounted for over three-quarters of the world's medical schools. In 2023, WFME leadership changed hands, and the ECFMG will take its first steps toward implementing its Recognized Accreditation Policy. APPROACH: In this article, we look back at the genesis of the RP and describe its first decade as informed by the limited existing peer-reviewed literature and the emerging activities of accrediting agencies that could have significant implications for the quality of medical education internationally. CONCLUSIONS: The rapidly growing influence of WFME on medical education worldwide has largely occurred without significant awareness or scrutiny, and there is a need for the WFME to demonstrate greater transparency, proactively engage its stakeholders, and support research and evaluation.

Competent to provide compassionate care? A critical discourse analysis of accreditation standards.

BACKGROUND: Medical school accreditation is recognised internationally as an important quality control process for programmes that lead to the Medical Doctor (MD) degree. Accreditation standards govern the accreditation process which in turn drives educational objectives. Given the power of these standards to shape what becomes valued in the curricula, it is therefore imperative to ensure that core values and ideals of the profession are meaningfully incorporated. As the provision of compassionate care has long been a central medical value, this value should be clearly articulated in MD programme accreditation standards. METHODS: We conducted a Critical Discourse Analysis of compassionate care within Undergraduate Medical Education (UME) Accreditation Standards governing North American medical schools since 1957. We explored how and to what extent the written language of the accreditation standards incorporated compassionate care. RESULTS: References to compassionate care in the UME Accreditation Standards were few and far between. Historically, a statement of 'The Objectives of Undergraduate Medical Education' published by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) was referenced for the first and only time in the 1957 standards, describing the development of attributes such as the provision of compassionate care as a basic objective of UME. Thereafter, there was infrequent mention of this value. Terms that could potentially incorporate aspects of compassionate care were identified, yet these were explicated in ways that limited connection to compassion. Instead, the term 'care' has increasingly been used instrumentally (ie acute care, chronic care). CONCLUSION: The relative absence of language pertaining to compassionate care in accreditation standards is troubling as compassion is integral to good medical care. This absence is particularly important to attend to in the current era of competency-based training where we must be explicit about all important curricular objectives lest essential values and practices be unintentionally lost.

Tackling the void: the importance of addressing absences in the field of health professions education research.

Many processes and practices in the field of health professions education have been based more on tradition and assumption than on evidence and theory. As the field matures, researchers are increasingly seeking evidence to support various teaching and assessment methods. However, there is a tendency to focus on a limited set of topics, leaving other areas under-examined and limiting our understanding of the field. By explicitly examining areas that are undescribed, i.e. absences in the literature, researchers and scholars have the potential to enrich our practice and our field's understanding of what counts as legitimate research. Using the theoretical framework of Bourdieu's concept of field, we conducted an instrumental case study of three published research projects that each had a finding of absence. We examined each case individually, and then analyzed across cases. Our dataset included published papers, peer-review feedback, and reflective notes. Each of the cases interrogated a different form of absence: absence of content, absence of research, and absence of evidence. While the typology suggests that each absence was different, there were similarities across cases in terms of challenges in 'proving' the reality of the absence and some disbelief or discomfort with accepting the findings as rigorous and/or legitimate. Absence research has potential to add to our theoretical and methodological approaches to the field. This type of research is potentially an exciting and productive new way for scholars to shed light on aspects of health professions education that have received limited attention to date.

Contending with Our Racial Past in Medical Education: A Foucauldian Perspective.

ISSUE: Practices of systemic and structural racism that advantage some groups over others are embedded in American society. Institutions of higher learning are increasingly being pressured to develop strategies that effectively address these inequities. This article examines medical education's diversity reforms and inclusion practices, arguing that many reify preexisting social hierarchies that privilege white individuals over those who are minoritized because of their race/ethnicity. Evidence: Drawing on the work of French theorist Michel Foucault, we argue that medical education's curricular and institutional practices reinforce asymmetrical power differences and authority in ways that disadvantage minoritized individuals. Practices, such as medical education's reliance on biomedical approaches, cultural competency, and standardized testing reinforce a racist system in ways congruent with the Foucauldian concept of "normalization." Through medical education's creation of subjects and its ability to normalize dominant forms of knowledge, trainees are shaped and socialized into ways of thinking, being, and acting that continue to support racial violence against minoritized groups. The systems, structures, and practices of medical education need to change to combat the pervasive forces that continue to shape racist institutional patterns. Individual medical educators will also need to employ critical approaches to their work and develop strategies that counteract institutional systems of racial violence. Implications: A Foucauldian approach that exposes the structural racism inherent in medical education enables both thoughtful criticism of status-quo diversity practices and practical, theory-driven solutions to address racial inequities. Using Foucault's work to interrogate questions of power, knowledge, and subjectivity can expand the horizon of racial justice reforms in medicine by attending to the specific, pervasive ways racial violence is performed, both intra- and extra-institutionally. Such an intervention promises to take seriously the importance of anti-racist methodology in medicine.

Dismantling the master's house: new ways of knowing for equity and social justice in health professions education.

Health professions education (HPE) is built on a structural foundation of modernity based on Eurocentric epistemologies. This foundation privileges certain forms of evidence and ways of knowing and is implicated in how dominant models of HPE curricula and healthcare practice position concepts of knowledge, equity, and social justice. This invited perspectives paper frames this contemporary HPE as the "Master's House", utilizing a term referenced from the writings of Audre Lorde. It examines the theoretical underpinnings of the "Master's House" through the frame of Quijano's concept of the Colonial Matrix of Power (employing examples of coloniality, race, and sex/gender). It concludes by exploring possibilities for how these Eurocentric structures may be dismantled, with reflection and discussion on the implications and opportunities of this work in praxis.

Family physicians and health advocacy: Is it really a difficult fit?

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether family medicine residents and faculty members appreciate the full spectrum of health advocacy as described in articles published in Canadian Family Physician in 2016 and to identify the perceived challenges and enablers of advocating across the entire spectrum. DESIGN: Analysis of a subset of data from a qualitative study using semistructured interviews and focus groups. SETTING: University of Toronto in Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 9 family medicine faculty members and 6 family medicine residents. METHODS: A subset of transcripts from a 2015 qualitative study that explored family medicine and psychiatry residents' and faculty members' understanding of the CanMEDS-Family Medicine health advocate role were reviewed, guided by interpretive descriptive methodology. MAIN FINDINGS: Results indicated that family medicine physicians and residents were able to identify the full spectrum of advocacy described in the Canadian Family Physician articles and that they valued the role. Further, there was widespread agreement that being a health advocate was linked with their identities as health professionals. The time it takes to be a health advocate was seen as a barrier to being effective in the role, and the work was seen as extremely challenging owing to system constraints. Participants also described a gap in training relating to advocacy at the system level as a challenge. CONCLUSION: Team-based care was seen as one of the most important enablers for becoming involved in the full spectrum of advocacy, as was time for personal reflection.

Competency-based medical education: the discourse of infallibility.

BACKGROUND: Over the last two decades, competency-based frameworks have been internationally adopted as the primary educational approach in medicine. Yet competency-based medical education (CBME) remains contested in the academic literature. We look broadly at the nature of this debate to explore how it may shape scholars' understanding of CBME, and its implications for medical education research and practice. In doing so, we deconstruct unarticulated discourses and assumptions embedded in the CBME literature. METHODS: We assembled an archive of literature focused on CBME. The archive dates from 1996, the publication year of the first CanMEDS Physician Competency Framework. We then conducted a Foucauldian critical discourse analysis (CDA) to delineate the dominant discourses underpinning the literature. CDA examines the intersections of language, social practices, knowledge and power relations to highlight how entrenched ways of thinking influence what can or cannot be said about a topic. FINDINGS: Detractors of CBME have advanced an array of conceptual critiques. Proponents have often responded with a recurring discursive strategy that minimises these critiques and deflects attention from the underlying concept of the competency-based approach. As part of this process, conceptual concerns are reframed as two practical problems: implementation and interpretation. Yet the assertion that these are the construct's primary concerns was often unsupported by empirical evidence. These practices contribute to a discourse of infallibility of CBME. DISCUSSION: In uncovering the discourse of infallibility, we explore how it can silence critical voices and hinder a rigorous examination of the competency-based approach. These discursive practices strengthen CBME by constructing it as infallible in the literature. We propose re-approaching the dialogue surrounding CBME as a starting point for empirical investigation, driven by the aim to broaden scholars' understanding of its design, development and implementation in medical education.

Identifying frailty in primary care: a qualitative description of family physicians' gestalt impressions of their older adult patients.

BACKGROUND: Many tools exist to guide family physicians' impressions about frailty status of older adults, but no single tool, instrument, or set of criteria has emerged as most useful. The role of physicians' subjective impressions in frailty decisions has not been studied. This study explores how family physicians conceptualize frailty, and the factors that they consider when making subjective decisions about patients' frailty statuses. METHODS: Descriptive qualitative study of family physicians who practice in a large urban academic family medicine center as they participated in one-on-one "think-aloud" interviews about the frailty status of their patients aged 80 years and over. Of 23 eligible family physicians, 18 shared their impressions about the frailty status of their older adult patients and the factors influencing their decisions. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Four themes were identified, the first of which described how physicians conceptualized frailty as a spectrum and dynamic in nature, but also struggled to conceptualize it without a formal definition in place. The remaining three themes described factors considered before determining patients' frailty statuses: physical characteristics (age, weight, medical conditions), functional characteristics (physical, cognitive, social) and living conditions (level of independence, availability of supports, physical environment). CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians viewed frailty as multifactorial, dynamic, and inclusive of functional and environmental factors. This conceptualization can be useful to make comprehensive and flexible evaluations of frailty status in conjunction with more objective frailty tools.

In search of educational efficiency: 30 years of Medical Education's top-cited articles.

CONTEXT: Academic journals represent shared spaces wherein the significance of thematic areas, methodologies and paradigms are debated and shaped through collective engagement. By studying journals in their historical and cultural contexts, the academic community can gain insight into the ways in which authors and audiences propose, develop, harness, revise and discard research subjects, methodologies and practices. METHODS: Thirty top-cited articles published in Medical Education between 1986 and 2014 were analysed in a two-step process. First, a descriptive classification of articles allowed us to quantify the frequency of content areas over the time span studied. Secondly, a discourse analysis was conducted to identify the continuities, disruptions and tensions within the three most prominent content areas. RESULTS: The top-cited articles in Medical Education focused on three major areas of interest: problem-based learning, simulation and assessment. In each of these areas of interest, we noted a tension between the desire to produce and apply standardised tools, and the recognition that the contexts of medical education are highly variable and influenced by political and financial considerations. The general preoccupation with achieving efficiency may paradoxically jeopardise the ability of medical schools to address the contextual needs of students, teachers and patients. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the topics of interest for a journal's scholarly audience and how these topics are discursively positioned, provides important information for researchers in deciding how they wish to engage with the field, as well as for educators as they assess the relevance of educational products for their local contexts.

Articulating the ideal: 50 years of interprofessional collaboration in Medical Education.

CONTEXT: Health care delivery and the education of clinicians have changed immensely since the creation of the journal Medical Education. In this project, we seek to answer the following three questions: How has the concept of collaboration changed over the past 50 years in Medical Education? Have the participants involved in collaboration shifted over time? Has the idea of collaboration itself been transformed over the past 50 years? METHODS: Starting from a constructionist view of scientific discourse, we used directed content analysis to sample, code and analyse 144 collaboration-related articles over the 50-year life span of Medical Education. We developed an analytical framework to identify the key components of varying articulations of 'collaboration', with a focus on shifts in language and terminology over time. Our sample was drawn from an archive of 1221 articles developed to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Medical Education. RESULTS: Interprofessional collaboration is conceptualised in three primary ways throughout our sample: as a psychometric property; as tasks or activities, and, more recently, as 'togetherness'. The first conceptualisation articulates collaboration as involving knowledge or skills that are teachable to individuals, the second as involving the education of teams to engage in structured meetings or task distribution, and the third as the building of networks of individuals who learn to form team identities. The 'leader' of collaboration is typically conceptualised as the doctor, who is consistently articulated by authors as the active agent of collaborative care. Other clinicians and students of other professions are, as the wording in this sentence suggests, usually positioned as 'others', and thus as more passive participants in, or even observers of, 'collaboration'. CONCLUSIONS: In order to meet goals of meaningful collaboration leading to higher-quality care, it behoves us as a community of educators and researchers to heed the ways in which we teach, think and write about interprofessional collaboration, interrogating our own language and assumptions that may be betraying and reproducing harmful care hierarchies.

Epistemology, culture, justice and power: non-bioscientific knowledge for medical training.

CONTEXT: While medical curricula were traditionally almost entirely comprised of bioscientific knowledge, widely accepted competency frameworks now make clear that physicians must be competent in far more than biomedical knowledge and technical skills. For example, of the influential CanMEDS roles, six are conceptually based in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). Educators frequently express uncertainty about what to teach in this area. This study concretely identifies the knowledge beyond bioscience needed to support the training of physicians competent in the six non-Medical Expert CanMEDS roles. METHODS: We interviewed 58 non-clinician university faculty members with doctorates in over 20 SSH disciplines. We abstracted our transcripts (meaning condensation, direct quotations) resulting in approximately 300 pages of data which we coded using top-down (by CanMEDS role) and bottom-up (thematically) approaches and analysed within a critical constructivist framework. Participants and clinicians with SSH PhDs member-checked and refined our results. RESULTS: Twelve interrelated themes were evident in the data. An understanding of epistemology, including the constructed nature of social knowledge, was seen as the foundational theme without which the others could not be taught or understood. Our findings highlighted three anchoring themes (Justice, Power, Culture), all of which link to eight more specific themes concerning future physicians' relationships to the world and the self. All 12 themes were cross-cutting, in that each related to all six non-Medical Expert CanMEDS roles. The data also provided many concrete examples of potential curricular content. CONCLUSIONS: There is a definable body of SSH knowledge that forms the academic underpinning for important physician competencies and is outside the experience of most medical educators. Curricular change incorporating such content is necessary if we are to strengthen the non-Medical Expert physician competencies. Our findings, particularly our cross-cutting themes, also provide a pedagogically useful mechanism for holistically teaching the underpinnings of physician competence. We are now implementing our findings into medical curricula.

Misalignments of purpose and power in an early Canadian interprofessional education initiative.

Interprofessional education (IPE) has been widely incorporated into health professional curricula and accreditation standards despite an arguably thin base of evidence regarding its clinical effects, theoretical underpinnings, and social implications. To better understand how and why IPE first took root, but failed to grow, this study examines one of the earliest documented IPE initiatives, which took place at the University of British Columbia between 1960 and 1975. We examined a subset of 110 texts (academic literature, grey literature, and unpublished records) from a larger study that uses Critical Discourse Analysis to trace the emergence of IPE in Canada. We asked how IPE was promoted and received, by whom, for what purposes, and to what effects. Our analysis demonstrates that IPE was promoted as a response to local challenges for the Faculty of Medicine as well as national challenges for Canada's emerging public healthcare system. These dual exigencies enabled the IPE initiative, but they shaped it in somewhat divergent ways: the former gave rise to its core component (a health sciences centre) and the latter its ultimate purpose (increasing the role of non-medical professions in primary care). Reception of the initiative was complicated by a further tension: nurses and allied health professionals were sometimes represented as independent experts with unique knowledge and skills, and sometimes as assistants or substitutes for medical doctors. We relate the successes and frustrations of this early initiative to particular (mis)alignments of purpose and relationships of power, some of which continue to enable and constrain IPE today.

Setting the standard: Medical Education's first 50 years.

CONTEXT: By understanding its history, the medical education community gains insight into why it thinks and acts as it does. This piece provides a Foucauldian archaeological critical discourse analysis (CDA) of the journal Medical Education on the publication of its 50th Volume. This analysis draws upon critical social science perspectives to allow the examination of unstated assumptions that underpin and shape educational tools and practices. METHODS: A Foucauldian form of CDA was utilised to examine the journal over its first half-century. This approach emphasises the importance of language, and the ways in which words used affect and are affected by educational practices and priorities. An iterative methodology was used to organise the very large dataset (12,000 articles). A distilled dataset, within which particular focus was placed on the editorial pieces in the journal, was analysed. RESULTS: A major finding was the diversity of the journal as a site that has permitted multiple - and sometimes contradictory - discursive trends to emerge. One particularly dominant discursive tension across the time span of the journal is that between a persistent drive for standardisation and a continued questioning of the desirability of standardisation. This tension was traced across three prominent areas of focus in the journal: objectivity and the nature of medical education knowledge; universality and local contexts, and the place of medical education between academia and the community. CONCLUSIONS: The journal has provided the medical education community with a place in which to both discuss practical pedagogical concerns and ponder conceptual and social issues affecting the medical education community. This dual nature of the journal brings together educators and researchers; it also gives particular focus to a major and rarely cited tension in medical education between the quest for objective standards and the limitations of standard measures.

Making sense of "alternative", "complementary", "unconventional" and "integrative" medicine: exploring the terms and meanings through a textual analysis.

BACKGROUND: Medical pluralism has flourished throughout the Western world in spite of efforts to legitimize Western biomedical healthcare as "conventional medicine" and thereby relegate all non-physician-related forms of healthcare to an "other" category. These "other" practitioners have been referred to as "unconventional", "alternative" and "complementary", among other terms throughout the past half century. METHODS: This study investigates the discourses surrounding the changes in the terms, and their meanings, used to describe unconventional medicine in North America. Terms identified by the literature as synonymous to unconventional medicine were searched using the Scopus database. A textual analysis following the method described by Kripendorff 2013 was subsequently performed on the five most highly-cited unconventional medicine-related peer-reviewed literature published between 1970 and 2013. RESULTS: Five commonly-used, unconventional medicine-related terms were identified. Authors using "complementary and alternative", "complementary", "alternative", or "unconventional" tended to define them by what they are not (e.g., therapies not taught/used in conventional medicine, therapy demands not met by conventional medicine, and therapies that lack research on safety, efficacy and effectiveness). Authors defined "integrated/integrative" medicine by what it is (e.g., a new model of healthcare, the combining of both conventional and unconventional therapies, accounting for the whole person, and preventative maintenance of health). Authors who defined terms by "what is not" stressed that the purpose of conducting research in this area was solely to create knowledge. Comparatively, authors who defined terms by "what is" sought to advocate for the evidence-based combination of unconventional and conventional medicines. Both author groups used scientific rhetoric to define unconventional medical practices. CONCLUSIONS: This emergence of two groups of authors who used two different sets of terms to refer to the concept of "unconventional medicine" may explain why some journals, practitioner associations and research/practice centres may choose to use both "what is not" and "what is" terms in their discourse to attract interest from both groups. Since each of the two groups of terms (and authors who use them) has different meanings and goals, the evolution of this discourse will continue to be an interesting phenomenon to explore in the future.

Louder than words: power and conflict in interprofessional education articles, 1954-2013.

CONTEXT: Interprofessional education (IPE) aspires to enable collaborative practice. Current IPE offerings, although rapidly proliferating, lack evidence of efficacy and theoretical grounding. OBJECTIVES: Our research aimed to explore the historical emergence of the field of IPE and to analyse the positioning of this academic field of inquiry. In particular, we sought to investigate the extent to which power and conflict - elements central to interprofessional care - figure in the IPE literature. METHODS: We used a combination of deductive and inductive automated coding and manual coding to explore the contents of 2191 articles in the IPE literature published between 1954 and 2013. Inductive coding focused on the presence and use of the sociological (rather than statistical) version of power, which refers to hierarchies and asymmetries among the professions. Articles found to be centrally about power were then analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Publications on IPE have grown exponentially in the past decade. Deductive coding of identified articles showed an emphasis on students, learning, programmes and practice. Automated inductive coding of titles and abstracts identified 129 articles potentially about power, but manual coding found that only six articles put power and conflict at the centre. Content analysis of these six articles revealed that two provided tentative explorations of power dynamics, one skirted around this issue, and three explicitly theorised and integrated power and conflict. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of attention to power and conflict in the IPE literature suggests that many educators do not foreground these issues. Education programmes are expected to transform individuals into effective collaborators, without heed to structural, organisational and institutional factors. In so doing, current constructions of IPE veil the problems that IPE attempts to solve.