Learners' Perspectives of Professionalism: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Systematic Review

Overview

Journal JMIR Res Protoc

Publisher JMIR Publications

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2022 Aug 25

PMID 36006688

Authors

Nagina Khan

Walther van Mook

Subodh Dave

Sohyun Ha

Joshua Sagisi

Nicole Davi

Chantel Aftab

Sucheta Tiwari

Marie Hickman

Wolfgang Gilliar

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Professionalism has come to be associated with competence in medical education, with the habitual and judicious use of communication, knowledge, technical skills, clinical reasoning, emotions, values, and reflection in daily practice for the benefit of the individual and community being served. Recent studies indicate students should have the opportunity to observe the application of knowledge and skills by their mentors to improve patient health and safety. A noticeable detail that needs implementation into the curriculum is the inclusion of student perspectives. This review will explore students' understanding and experience of professionalism in undergraduate medical education (UME).

Objective: This paper presents the protocol for a review that aims to develop an integrated synthesis of qualitative and quantitative studies resulting in recommendations for medical school curricula to incorporate the learners' perspectives in teaching professionalism in UME.

Methods: We will take an integrated approach to synthesis. Data will be extracted from the included studies, and quantitative data will be "qualitized." PubMed (Medline), Embase, PsycInfo, and ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) will be searched for studies published in English from 2010 to 2021. Studies will be screened and critically appraised for methodological quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool by 2 researchers, with disagreements resolved by a third researcher. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies will be considered. Our population of interest is undergraduate medical students; hence, studies on medical residents and graduate medical students will be excluded. We will consider studies that explore how concepts of professionalism are understood, experienced, and taught in undergraduate medicine and on how medical students understand and develop the identified constructs of professionalism.

Results: This study is in the screening phase; therefore, no results are available at this time. However, we had initiated the searches, screening, and are currently in the critical appraisal stage. We will commence preparation to clean and convert the data for coding in July 2022, and analysis will be ongoing from the end of July 2022 until submission for publication in November 2022.

Conclusions: This research will contribute to the student perspectives on professionalism in medical education literature. The findings will aid in the creation of a checklist to guide the development of a curriculum on professionalism in UME.

International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): PRR1-10.2196/37473.

References

Whittemore R . Combining evidence in nursing research: methods and implications. Nurs Res. 2005; 54(1):56-62. DOI: 10.1097/00006199-200501000-00008. View

Blank L, Kimball H, McDonald W, Merino J . Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physician charter 15 months later. Ann Intern Med. 2003; 138(10):839-41. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-138-10-200305200-00012. View

Sandelowski M . Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data collection, and analysis techniques in mixed-method studies. Res Nurs Health. 2000; 23(3):246-55. DOI: 10.1002/1098-240x(200006)23:3<246::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-h. View

McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel D, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C . PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016; 75:40-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021. View

Mueller P . Incorporating professionalism into medical education: the Mayo Clinic experience. Keio J Med. 2009; 58(3):133-43. DOI: 10.2302/kjm.58.133. View

Stern C, Lizarondo L, Carrier J, Godfrey C, Rieger K, Salmond S . Methodological guidance for the conduct of mixed methods systematic reviews. JBI Evid Synth. 2020; 18(10):2108-2118. DOI: 10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00169. View

Page M, McKenzie J, Bossuyt P, Boutron I, Hoffmann T, Mulrow C . The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2021; 18(3):e1003583. PMC: 8007028. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583. View

Whittemore R, Knafl K . The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs. 2005; 52(5):546-53. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x. View

Walsh D, Downe S . Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. J Adv Nurs. 2005; 50(2):204-11. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03380.x. View

10.

Cuesta-Briand B, Auret K, Johnson P, Playford D . 'A world of difference': a qualitative study of medical students' views on professionalism and the 'good doctor'. BMC Med Educ. 2014; 14:77. PMC: 3992127. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-14-77. View

11.

Kamdar G, Kessler D, Tilt L, Srivastava G, Khanna K, Chang T . Qualitative evaluation of just-in-time simulation-based learning: the learners' perspective. Simul Healthc. 2013; 8(1):43-8. DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e31827861e8. View

12.

Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A . Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016; 5(1):210. PMC: 5139140. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4. View

13.

Lamb J, Bower P, Rogers A, Dowrick C, Gask L . Access to mental health in primary care: a qualitative meta-synthesis of evidence from the experience of people from 'hard to reach' groups. Health (London). 2011; 16(1):76-104. DOI: 10.1177/1363459311403945. View

14.

Mann K . Theoretical perspectives in medical education: past experience and future possibilities. Med Educ. 2010; 45(1):60-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03757.x. View

15.

Myors K, Schmied V, Johnson M, Cleary M . Collaboration and integrated services for perinatal mental health: an integrative review. Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2020; 18(1):1-10. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-3588.2011.00639.x. View

16.

. Learning objectives for medical student education--guidelines for medical schools: report I of the Medical School Objectives Project. Acad Med. 1999; 74(1):13-8. DOI: 10.1097/00001888-199901000-00010. View