Search

Introduction A vital element of health care practice is evidence-based medicine, the explicit and judicious use of current, best-available evidence in making decisions about the individualized care of patients. With the use of evidence-based medicine continually increasing in clinical practice, medical schools are charged with ensuring graduates are prepared to appropriately access, appraise, and utilize clinical evidence, highlighting the need for a corresponding assessment tool. However, assessing evidence-based practice remains a challenging endeavor for medical educators. Few assessment tools capture students' ability to apply information resources in order to answer a targeted question during a medical encounter. Methods We describe a triple-jump assessment design where students access evidence, appraise information at hand, and apply it to formulate a treatment plan during an observed structured clinical encounter (OSCE). Results One hundred and five clerkship students participated in one of two OSCE scenarios. Data from this exercise underwent descriptive statistical analysis, including mean performance scores and confidence scores, and showed that accuracy and confidence in providing evidence-based care improved after the search and appraisal period. Discussion The addition of a modified triple-jump assessment to the end of the OSCE experience not only creates a more authentic experience but also allows for assessment and development of student metacognitive skills within the domain of knowledge gap assessment. The ease of integrating this assessment into the structure of an already-developed OSCE allows for different types of assessment to be achieved without writing entirely new OSCE cases, but rather by modifying existing scenarios.

Introduction The development of junior faculty drives the success of an academic institutional department through furthering individual career success. Mentorship is central in this early development and results in improved job satisfaction as well as job retention in academic medicine. A recent survey of junior faculty revealed that less than 50% felt adequately mentored. Additionally, faculty on the clinician-educator track were less likely to have a mentor than colleagues on the physician-scientist track. Since 2000, numerous publications have documented faculty development programs, many of which place mentorship in a central role. Faculty development programs have focused on delivering the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required for success, including professional development and scholarship. Methods This guide provides an overview of the design and implementation process of the Vanderbilt Department of Pediatrics Hazinski Society for Faculty Development, as well as a reference for the specific curricula used in the program. We describe the steps of design, recruitment of both junior faculty participants and senior faculty facilitators, and the process of obtaining support from both departmental and division-specific leadership. A description is provided for the flow of a typical session, as well as access to all curricular documents used within the program. This guide should serve as a ready reference for users planning to implement a similar program at their own institutions. Results Participants in the program reported a significant change in knowledge, skills, and attitudes in the areas of professional development and scholarship. These advances were associated with a reported increase in the skill/ability to create career goals as well as to align current activities with desired goals. Discussion The program described here was created in a grassroots design through a needs assessment via small groups of junior faculty, as well as junior faculty playing a central role in the programmatic development through the organizing committee. Hence, the curriculum design (as well as the peer network established through the small groups) has led to significant changes.