What’s New and In the Queue for Academic Medicine

AM Rounds Slider Master-23

What’s New: A Preview of the December Issue
The December issue of Academic Medicine is now available! Read the entire issue online at academicmedicine.org or on your iPad using the Academic Medicine for iPad app. Highlights from the issue include:

Health Reform and Academic Health Centers: Commentary on an Evolving Paradigm
In this New Conversations piece, Wartman and colleagues discuss how public policy and market-based health reforms have played out relative to expectations. They identify six formidable challenges facing academic health centers in the post-ACA environment.

Identifying and Promoting Best Practices in Residency Application and Selection in a Complex Academic Health Network
Bandiera and colleagues describe the University of Toronto’s centralized approach to defining system-level best practices for residency application and selection. They share key principles and recommended best practices.

The Evolution of an Elective in Health Disparities and Advocacy: Description of Instructional Strategies and Program Evaluation
Gonzalez and colleagues find a health disparities elective for first-year medical students offers comprehensive, interactive training to address both systemic and provider causes of disparities. A blog post to this article written by the author is available.

Measuring Diversity and Inclusion in Academic Medicine: The Diversity Engagement Survey
Person and colleagues present the 22-item Diversity Engagement Survey, which consists of eight factors that connect engagement theory to inclusion and diversity constructs, as a diagnostic and benchmarking tool.

What’s In the Queue: A Sneak Peek
Here’s a preview of an upcoming review by Havyer and colleagues.

Addressing the Interprofessional Collaboration Competencies of the Association of American Medical Colleges: A Systematic Review of Assessment Instruments in Undergraduate Medical Education

Rachel D. Havyer, MD, Darlene R. Nelson, MD, Majken T. Wingo, MD, Nneka I. Comfere, MD, Andrew J. Halvorsen, MS, Furman S. McDonald, MD, MPH, and Darcy A. Reed, MD, MPH

To summarize the characteristics and validity evidence of tools that assess teamwork in undergraduate medical education (UME), and provide recommendations for addressing the interprofessional collaboration competencies of the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC).

The authors conducted a systematic review, searching MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-process, CINAHL, and PsycINFO from January 1, 1979, through April 1, 2014; they also searched reference lists and national meeting abstracts. They included original research reports that described a quantitative tool used to assess teamwork in UME. They abstracted characteristics and validity evidence for the tools, plus study quality, according to established frameworks. Two authors independently abstracted 25% of articles and calculated agreement. Authors then applied pre-defined criteria to identify tools best suited to address the AAMC’s teamwork competencies.

Of 13,549 citations, 70 articles describing 64 teamwork assessment tools were included. Of these 64 tools, 27 (42%) assessed teamwork in classroom, 31 (48%) in simulation, and only 7 (11%) in actual clinical settings. The majority (47, 73%) of tools assessed medical students’ teamwork in interprofessional teams. Based on content concordance, strength of validity evidence, generalizability of scores, and level of outcomes, four published tools were recommended to assess the AAMC’s teamwork competencies: the Collaborative Healthcare Interdisciplinary Relationship Planning Scale, Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale, Communication and Teamwork Skills instrument, and Teamwork Mini-clinical Evaluation Exercise.

Substantial validity evidence supports the use of several UME teamwork assessments. Four tools have been appropriately designed and sufficiently studied to constitute appropriate assessments of the AAMC’s teamwork competencies.

Related Posts

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: