MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2003934940 · doi:10.4300/jgme-d-11-00148.1

The Resident-as-Teacher: It's More Than Just About Student Learning

2011· article· en· W2003934940 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linda Snell

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Graduate Medical Education · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueInnovations in Medical Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedical educationTask (project management)PsychologyMedicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Docere, the Latin root of the word doctor, means to teach, and teaching is an intrinsic part of being a physician. Most physicians routinely teach their students, residents, colleagues, and patients. Residents regularly contribute to the education of medical students and their fellow residents and may spend up to one-fourth of their time supervising, instructing, and evaluating students and junior colleagues.1 Teaching by residents is different from, and likely complementary to, that of their attending staff and faculty. Residents tend to teach (1) different things (bedside skills and patient management rather than factual knowledge),2 (2) in a different way (as near-peer teachers); and (3) at different times (teaching while on-call). The impact of effective resident teaching goes beyond medical students and includes effects on patients but has particular benefits for the residents themselves and the systems in which they work and learn.Medical students benefit greatly from having residents as teachers: it has been estimated that nearly one-third of their learning in the clinical setting comes from residents.1 As near-peer teachers, residents are close enough to the students they teach to understand the optimal approach for them to learn.3 Residents also are “consciously competent,” that is, they still can deconstruct performance on a clinical task and articulate the detailed steps to facilitate learning by novices and advanced beginners. Beyond that, residents are important role models for their junior colleagues,4,5 and students likely acquire professional values and behaviors from their resident supervisors.Resident teaching has other positive effects on students. Highly rated resident-teachers increase student satisfaction. The study by Huynh and colleagues6 in this issue shows that positive experiences with resident-teachers and a perceived high quality of resident education is associated with high overall satisfaction with a clerkship rotation. Medical students' career choice has also been linked with good resident teaching in surgery.7There are also effects on the residents themselves: Those who teach have increased enthusiasm for teaching and greater job satisfaction.5 In addition, residents who are more successful or higher-rated teachers tend to have better knowledge acquisition.1,8 There may thus be some truth to Joseph Joubert's adage “to teach is to learn twice.”9Residents with effective teaching skills may also have a positive effect on patient care. Resident involvement in teaching activities has been shown to have a positive effect on the resident's communication skills,3 and good patient communication skills have been associated with better clinical outcomes.8.10Given these benefits of teaching by residents, a concern raised by the Huynh and colleagues6 study is that the residents did not address all the learning objectives of the medical students. It is not clear whether that is a generalizable finding or related to reduced teaching on particular topics in the program studied. The authors' recommendation is for programs to ensure residents are prepared to teach in all the common content areas and key competencies needed by the students.From a systems perspective, teaching is one of the skill domains in competency frameworks, such as that of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada or the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, which form the basis of residency education and accreditation requirements.11,12 Recognizing the critical role of resident teaching skills, the North American undergraduate medical education accreditation body requires programs and resources “to enhance the teaching and assessment skills of residents.”13(p14)The findings of Huynh and colleagues6 underscore that residents need formal instruction, support, and mentoring to enhance their teaching skills. Guidance on how to build an effective resident-as-teacher program has been published.4 Excellent programs exist and have been shown to improve residents' teaching skills14 and clinical knowledge.1,8 Resident-as-teacher programs appear to do more than this and have positive effects on medical student perceptions of their clerkships. We can only encourage that these programs continue to be studied and become available to all trainees.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,014
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,047

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,021
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0060,008
Communication savante0,0110,017
Science ouverte0,0020,010
Intégrité de la recherche0,0070,012
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0140,007

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,058
Tête enseignante GPT0,407
Écart entre enseignants0,349 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations86
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Graduate Medical EducationMême sujetInnovations in Medical EducationTravaux en français237 207