Refugee Health Curriculum in Undergraduate Medical Education (UME): A Scoping Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenomenon: An increasing number of refugees in recent years has led to changes in healthcare delivery. Historically, health care providers did not receive systematic and longitudinal training in refugee health. There is increasing interest among educators in developing educational opportunities for medical students to gain more training on how to care for this population. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and analyze existing literature on educational content and methods of delivery in Undergraduate Medical Education (UME) curricula related to refugees. Approach: The authors conducted a scoping review. Our search was conducted in seven electronic bibliographic databases. The search strategy was restricted to English language and scholarly articles. Three members of the research team tabulated and summarized extracted data. A qualitative thematic analysis was conducted to present findings. Findings: Of the 717 publications found, 24 met our inclusion criteria. The articles included in this review were published between 2003 and 2019. Thirteen (57.6%) were descriptive papers, three (11.5%) qualitative, four (15.3%) quantitative, and one (3.8%) mixed methods. Other publications included one commentary, one letter to the editor, and one review paper. Three main descriptive themes were identified: (1) Content related to refugees’ curriculum, (2) Teaching strategies, and (3) Learning outcomes. Insights: Studies included in our review suggest that delivering refugee health curricula to medical students improve self-perception of cross-cultural knowledge, communication, and physical exam skills that are necessary to deliver proper healthcare. Medical schools should focus on developing a longitudinal and standardized approach to teaching refugee health through the use of interactive and diverse learning methods while engaging with the community to ensure a better provision of health care for vulnerable populations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it