Expectations for PhDs in health professions education: an international EPA-framed, modified Delphi study.

Health professions education (HPE) has matured into field of study that employs and produces specialized educational scholars. Many academic institutions employ such scholars to support development and innovation in education. Simultaneously, the possibilities to obtain a PhD degree in HPE are expanding. Clarity in the expectations that such a degree brings along can be useful for scholars, employers and institutions. Anticipating that the views of what a PhD in HPE is or should be can vary between institutions, cultures and countries, we conducted an international Delphi study to identify EPAs for HPE PhDs. We used a framework of 24 EPAs resulted from a national consensus study in Iran as input to seek more generalized validity and a wider consensus of reasonably suitable activities. A three-round modified Delphi study was conducted with participation of 15 international experts. Final framework consisted of 17 relevant EPAs with a justification, specifications and limitations, and risks in case of failure per EPA (all had overall CVI > 0.8 for adequacy of description). Eleven EPAs were considered by the majority to be core to PhD training, 16 to be desirable for HPE PhDs as a capability to carry out without supervision, but the majority would trust current HPE PhDs to carry out only 5 of the 17 without supervision. The EPAs identified in this study arguably reflect the expectations of educators with a PhD degree in HPE. The framework has the potential to advance HPE training across countries and to inform personal development and employment decisions.

Developing entrustable professional activities for doctoral graduates in health professions education: obtaining a national consensus in Iran.

BACKGROUND: The number of doctoral programs in health professions education (HPE) is expanding. Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) can be a mechanism to define the expected activities of the HPE doctorate to inform training and assessment processes. The purpose of this study was to develop and reach a consensus on EPAs for HPE doctoral graduates. METHODS: We used a modified Nominal Group Technique (NGT) to elicit EPA titles followed by two rounds of a modified Delphi survey to seek consensus on the EPAs among groups of experts (HPE doctoral graduates and Board of HPE Examiners members) at the national level in Iran between July 2019 and July 2020. RESULTS: A total number of 92 initial EPA titles, which emerged from brainstorming in the NGT meeting, was reduced to 27 titles during the clarification process. The final EPA framework consisted of 24 EPA titles with descriptions, arranged in three categories: Research and scholarship (6 EPAs), Educational development (11 EPAs) and Educational management (7 EPAs). All final EPAs scored ≥80% agreement at the national level. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed EPAs framework can be used to improve the HPE doctorate training and to inform employment decisions. A future international consensus procedure could use these EPA outcomes as a starting point.