Trauma Informed Educational Strategies and Recommendations for Post-Secondary Health Science Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While trauma-informed care is commonly discussed in the context of interactions between healthcare providers and patients, its significance also extends to educational environments. Within post-secondary institutions, a considerable number of students begin their academic journey carrying experiences of past traumas or encounter trauma during their training. This is particularly relevant for health science education, where the curriculum involves addressing sensitive topics within classroom, laboratory, and clinical settings. These learning situations can inadvertently expose students to the risk of reliving trauma or experiencing distressing emotional responses. Hence, educators need to be attuned to their students' traumatic backgrounds and incorporate evidence-based techniques that mitigate distress, to adequately prepare students for their clinical practice roles. The objective was to systematically identify trauma informed educational (TIE) strategies or recommendations that have been implemented in post-secondary health science programs. This scoping review was completed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scoping review methodology. A search of academic literature was completed using the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase (Ovid), Education Source Complete, and ERIC. Search results were screened by two reviewers for relevance and data extraction was completed using a customized tool. Results were synthesized and aggregated in JBI SUMARI. Findings from 42 studies with diverse methodological approaches identified seven elements characterizing trauma-informed strategies (awareness, prevention, preparation, exposure, coping skills, flexibility, and structure). These elements were observed across five distinct strata of educational settings: 1) institutional, 2) curriculum, 3) educator, 4) student, and 5) equity and diversity. Integrating TIE strategies into health science education is urgently needed to create safe learning environments, better equip educators, and empower students to navigate trauma-related content with confidence and sensitivity. As the healthcare landscape continues to evolve, a collective commitment to advancing trauma informed education will ultimately contribute to more resilient, informed, and compassionate healthcare professionals.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".