Is There a Problem With Evidence in Health Professions Education?

Autor:	Ellaway RH, O'Brien BC, Sherbino J, Maggio LA, Artino AR Jr, Nimmon L, Park YS, Young M, Thomas A
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges [Acad Med] 2024 Aug 01; Vol. 99 (8), pp. 841-848. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Apr 03.
DOI:	10.1097/ACM.0000000000005730
Abstrakt:	Abstract: What constitutes evidence, what value evidence has, and how the needs of knowledge producers and those who consume this knowledge might be better aligned are questions that continue to challenge the health sciences. In health professions education (HPE), debates on these questions have ebbed and flowed with little sense of resolution or progress. In this article, the authors explore whether there is a problem with evidence in HPE using thought experiments anchored in Argyris' learning loops framework.From a single-loop perspective ("How are we doing?"), there may be many problems with evidence in HPE, but little is known about how research evidence is being used in practice and policy. A double-loop perspective ("Could we do better?") suggests expectations of knowledge producers and knowledge consumers might be too high, which suggests more system-wide approaches to evidence-informed practice in HPE are needed. A triple-loop perspective ("Are we asking the right questions?") highlights misalignments between the dynamics of research and decision-making, such that scholarly inquiry may be better approached as a way of advancing broader conversations, rather than contributing to specific decision-making processes.The authors ask knowledge producers and consumers to be more attentive to the translation from knowledge to evidence. They also argue for more systematic tracking and audit of how research knowledge is used as evidence. Given that research does not always have to serve practical purposes or address the problems of a particular program or institution, the relationship between knowledge and evidence should be understood in terms of changing conversations and influencing decisions. (Copyright © 2024 Written work prepared by employees of the Federal Government as part of their official duties is, under the U.S. Copyright Act, a “work of the United States Government” for which copyright protection under Title 17 of the United States Code is not available. As such, copyright does not extend to the contributions of employees of the Federal Government.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu