Improving third-year medical students' competency in clinical moral reasoning: two interventions

P.J. Cummins, K.J. Mendis, R. Fallar, A. Favia, L.E. Frank, C. Plunkett, N. Gligorov, R. Rhodes

Onderzoeksoutput: Bijdrage aan tijdschriftTijdschriftartikelAcademicpeer review

2 Citaties (Scopus)

Uittreksel

Background: This article reports on the impact of two ethics interventions implemented for third-year medical students. Previous research validated our institution's model for assessing medical students' competency in medical ethics. Confident in our assessment model, the bioethics faculty sought to improve student performance. Methods: We designed and implemented two additions to the third-year medical ethics curriculum: a written ethics project with faculty feedback, and a standardized glossary of the bioethical concepts addressed by our curriculum. To measure the impact of the written ethics project, we compared students' scores on their comprehensive ethics assessment in 2011, prior to the curricular additions, to the 2013 scores of students who only received the written ethics assignment supplement. To measure the impact of the glossary we distributed it to half of the students sitting for the ethics assessment in 2013, and compared their scores with their classmates' who had not received the glossary. Results: The 2013 students who only received the written ethics project scored 12.5% higher than the 2011 students, and they displayed significant improvement in justifying a resolution of a clinical ethical dilemma. The 2013 students who received the glossary were significantly better at recognizing which principles and concepts of biomedical ethics were relevant to a clinical case and explaining how they created a conflict. Conclusions: Medical student competency in clinical moral reasoning is enhanced by written ethics projects, a faculty feedback component, and access to a glossary of ethical terms.
Originele taal-2Engels
Pagina's (van-tot)140-148
Aantal pagina's9
TijdschriftAJOB Empirical Bioethics
Volume7
Nummer van het tijdschrift3
Vroegere onlinedatum24 jul 2015
DOI's
StatusGepubliceerd - 2016

Vingerafdruk

Clinical Competence
Medical Students
Ethics
medical student
moral philosophy
Students
Medical Ethics
Bioethics
student
medical ethics
Curriculum
Competency
Moral Reasoning
curriculum
bioethics
supplement
Glossary
Research

Citeer dit

Cummins, P.J. ; Mendis, K.J. ; Fallar, R. ; Favia, A. ; Frank, L.E. ; Plunkett, C. ; Gligorov, N. ; Rhodes, R. / Improving third-year medical students' competency in clinical moral reasoning : two interventions. In: AJOB Empirical Bioethics. 2016 ; Vol. 7, Nr. 3. blz. 140-148.
@article{7e1bac3c5bf94dfd9f7b23188f7e9d62,
title = "Improving third-year medical students' competency in clinical moral reasoning: two interventions",
abstract = "Background: This article reports on the impact of two ethics interventions implemented for third-year medical students. Previous research validated our institution's model for assessing medical students' competency in medical ethics. Confident in our assessment model, the bioethics faculty sought to improve student performance. Methods: We designed and implemented two additions to the third-year medical ethics curriculum: a written ethics project with faculty feedback, and a standardized glossary of the bioethical concepts addressed by our curriculum. To measure the impact of the written ethics project, we compared students' scores on their comprehensive ethics assessment in 2011, prior to the curricular additions, to the 2013 scores of students who only received the written ethics assignment supplement. To measure the impact of the glossary we distributed it to half of the students sitting for the ethics assessment in 2013, and compared their scores with their classmates' who had not received the glossary. Results: The 2013 students who only received the written ethics project scored 12.5{\%} higher than the 2011 students, and they displayed significant improvement in justifying a resolution of a clinical ethical dilemma. The 2013 students who received the glossary were significantly better at recognizing which principles and concepts of biomedical ethics were relevant to a clinical case and explaining how they created a conflict. Conclusions: Medical student competency in clinical moral reasoning is enhanced by written ethics projects, a faculty feedback component, and access to a glossary of ethical terms.",
keywords = "clinical moral reasoning, ethics education, medical ethics curriculum, medical school",
author = "P.J. Cummins and K.J. Mendis and R. Fallar and A. Favia and L.E. Frank and C. Plunkett and N. Gligorov and R. Rhodes",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1080/23294515.2015.1065931",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "140--148",
journal = "AJOB Empirical Bioethics",
issn = "2329-4515",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

Cummins, PJ, Mendis, KJ, Fallar, R, Favia, A, Frank, LE, Plunkett, C, Gligorov, N & Rhodes, R 2016, 'Improving third-year medical students' competency in clinical moral reasoning: two interventions', AJOB Empirical Bioethics, vol. 7, nr. 3, blz. 140-148. https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2015.1065931

Improving third-year medical students' competency in clinical moral reasoning : two interventions. / Cummins, P.J.; Mendis, K.J.; Fallar, R.; Favia, A.; Frank, L.E.; Plunkett, C.; Gligorov, N.; Rhodes, R.

In: AJOB Empirical Bioethics, Vol. 7, Nr. 3, 2016, blz. 140-148.

Onderzoeksoutput: Bijdrage aan tijdschriftTijdschriftartikelAcademicpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Improving third-year medical students' competency in clinical moral reasoning

T2 - two interventions

AU - Cummins, P.J.

AU - Mendis, K.J.

AU - Fallar, R.

AU - Favia, A.

AU - Frank, L.E.

AU - Plunkett, C.

AU - Gligorov, N.

AU - Rhodes, R.

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Background: This article reports on the impact of two ethics interventions implemented for third-year medical students. Previous research validated our institution's model for assessing medical students' competency in medical ethics. Confident in our assessment model, the bioethics faculty sought to improve student performance. Methods: We designed and implemented two additions to the third-year medical ethics curriculum: a written ethics project with faculty feedback, and a standardized glossary of the bioethical concepts addressed by our curriculum. To measure the impact of the written ethics project, we compared students' scores on their comprehensive ethics assessment in 2011, prior to the curricular additions, to the 2013 scores of students who only received the written ethics assignment supplement. To measure the impact of the glossary we distributed it to half of the students sitting for the ethics assessment in 2013, and compared their scores with their classmates' who had not received the glossary. Results: The 2013 students who only received the written ethics project scored 12.5% higher than the 2011 students, and they displayed significant improvement in justifying a resolution of a clinical ethical dilemma. The 2013 students who received the glossary were significantly better at recognizing which principles and concepts of biomedical ethics were relevant to a clinical case and explaining how they created a conflict. Conclusions: Medical student competency in clinical moral reasoning is enhanced by written ethics projects, a faculty feedback component, and access to a glossary of ethical terms.

AB - Background: This article reports on the impact of two ethics interventions implemented for third-year medical students. Previous research validated our institution's model for assessing medical students' competency in medical ethics. Confident in our assessment model, the bioethics faculty sought to improve student performance. Methods: We designed and implemented two additions to the third-year medical ethics curriculum: a written ethics project with faculty feedback, and a standardized glossary of the bioethical concepts addressed by our curriculum. To measure the impact of the written ethics project, we compared students' scores on their comprehensive ethics assessment in 2011, prior to the curricular additions, to the 2013 scores of students who only received the written ethics assignment supplement. To measure the impact of the glossary we distributed it to half of the students sitting for the ethics assessment in 2013, and compared their scores with their classmates' who had not received the glossary. Results: The 2013 students who only received the written ethics project scored 12.5% higher than the 2011 students, and they displayed significant improvement in justifying a resolution of a clinical ethical dilemma. The 2013 students who received the glossary were significantly better at recognizing which principles and concepts of biomedical ethics were relevant to a clinical case and explaining how they created a conflict. Conclusions: Medical student competency in clinical moral reasoning is enhanced by written ethics projects, a faculty feedback component, and access to a glossary of ethical terms.

KW - clinical moral reasoning

KW - ethics education

KW - medical ethics curriculum

KW - medical school

U2 - 10.1080/23294515.2015.1065931

DO - 10.1080/23294515.2015.1065931

M3 - Article

VL - 7

SP - 140

EP - 148

JO - AJOB Empirical Bioethics

JF - AJOB Empirical Bioethics

SN - 2329-4515

IS - 3

ER -