Should I do a synthesis (i.e. literature review)?

This column is intended to address the kinds of knotty problems and dilemmas with which many scholars grapple in studying health professions education. In this article, the authors address the question of whether one should conduct a literature review or knowledge synthesis, considering the why, when, and how, as well as its potential pitfalls. The goal is to guide supervisors and students who are considering whether to embark on a literature review in education research.

Advancing anti-oppression and social justice in healthcare through competency-based medical education (CBME).

Competency-based medical education (CBME) focuses on preparing physicians to improve the health of patients and populations. In the context of ongoing health disparities worldwide, medical educators must implement CBME in ways that advance social justice and anti-oppression. In this article, authors describe how CBME can be implemented to promote equity pedagogy, an approach to education in which curricular design, teaching, assessment strategies, and learning environments support learners from diverse groups to be successful. The five core components of CBME programs - outcomes competency framework, progressive sequencing of competencies, learning experiences tailored to learners' needs, teaching focused on competencies, and programmatic assessment - enable individualization of learning experiences and teaching and encourage learners to partner with their teachers in driving their learning. These educational approaches appreciate each learner's background, experiences, and strengths. Using an exemplar case study, the authors illustrate how CBME can afford opportunities to enhance anti-oppression and social justice in medical education and promote each learner's success in meeting the expected outcomes of training. The authors provide recommendations for individuals and institutions implementing CBME to enact equity pedagogy.

Screening for Food Insecurity: A Curriculum for Medical Students.

Introduction: Food insecurity (FI) is defined as a lack of access to enough food for an active, healthy life. We sought to determine how a longitudinal FI screening curriculum impacts medical students' knowledge, attitudes, and behavior in screening for FI. Methods: This was a prospective, single-institution study. The curriculum consisted of three components completed over 3 years. We administered a survey to the intervention cohort before and after the curriculum and analyzed their written reflections. We also evaluated whether students screened for FI during an objective structured clinical exam (OSCE) and compared their performance to a control cohort, which did not receive the curriculum. Results: Preintervention, students felt screening for FI was important for physicians to do with their patients, but most felt uncomfortable addressing it in clinical settings. Postintervention, there was a statistically significant increase in mean scores for knowledge questions (45.24% vs 74.74%, P<.001, pre- and postintervention, respectively). Students also felt more confident in their abilities to screen and follow up about FI. Additionally, compared to the control cohort, the intervention cohort screened for FI more often during their OSCE (28.21% vs 10.71%, P<.001). Conclusion: A longitudinal curriculum using minimal curricular time can improve students' knowledge, attitudes, and behavior when screening for FI. Students who received the curriculum were more likely to recognize the need for and perform FI screening. Based on these findings, we anticipate that the curriculum will increase the likelihood of students identifying, screening for, and intervening in cases of FI in future clinical encounters.