Redefining Quality in Medical Education Research: A Consumer's View

Author:

Sullivan Gail M.,Simpson Deborah,Cook David A.,DeIorio Nicole M.,Andolsek Kathryn,Opas Lawrence,Philibert Ingrid,Yarris Lalena M.

Abstract

Abstract Background Despite an explosion of medical education research and publications, it is not known how medical educator consumers decide what to read or apply in their practice. Objective To determine how consumers of medical education research define quality and value. Methods Journal of Graduate Medical Education editors performed a literature search to identify articles on medical education research quality published between 2000 and 2013, surveyed medical educators for their criteria for judging quality, and led a consensus-building workshop at a 2013 Association of American Medical Colleges meeting to further explore how users defined quality in education research. The workshop used standard consensus-building techniques to reach concept saturation. Attendees then voted for the 3 concepts they valued most in medical education research. Results The 110 survey responses generated a list of 37 overlapping features in 10 categories considered important aspects of quality. The literature search yielded 27 articles, including quality indexes, systematic and narrative reviews, and commentaries. Thirty-two participants, 12 facilitators, and 1 expert observer attended the workshop. Participants endorsed the following features of education research as being most valuable: (1) provocative, novel, or challenged established thinking; (2) adhered to sound research principles; (3) relevant to practice, role, or needs; (4) feasible, practical application in real-world settings; and (5) connection to a conceptual framework. Conclusions Medical educators placed high value on rigorous methods and conceptual frameworks, consistent with published quality indexes. They also valued innovative or provocative work, feasibility, and applicability to their setting. End-user opinions of quality may illuminate how educators translate knowledge into practice.

Publisher

Journal of Graduate Medical Education

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 21 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3