4.5 Article

Curricular disconnects in learning communication skills: What and how students learn about communication during clinical clerkships

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 91, 期 1, 页码 85-90

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.10.011

关键词

Medical education; Clinical communication skills; Teaching; Learning; Hidden curriculum; Clinical training; Faculty development

资金

  1. University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine Educational Development Fund
  2. Harold A. Myers Medical Education Professorship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: In many medical schools, formal training in clinical communication skills (CCS) mainly occurs during pre-clinical training prior to clinical rotations. The current research examined student perceptions of both what and how they learn about CCS during clinical rotations. Methods: During 2008 and 2009, 4th year medical students were invited to participate in interviews focused on learning of CCS during clinical rotations. Interview transcripts were analyzed to identify salient themes in their discussions of CCS in clinical learning experiences. Results: 107 senior students participated and reported learning CCS during clinical rotations mainly-by: (1) observing faculty and residents; (2) conducting interviews themselves; and (3) through feedback on patient presentations. Teacher role modeling tended to not reinforce what they had learned pre-clinically about CCS and clinical teachers rarely discussed CCS. Feedback on patient presentations affected students' communication styles, at times prompting them to omit use of CCS they had learned pre-clinically. Conclusions: Students reported that clinical learning experiences often do not reinforce the CCS they learn pre-clinically. Practical implications: Disconnects between pre-clinical and clinical CCS teaching need to be reconciled through more explicit pedagogical attention to CCS issues during clinical rotations both in the formal and informal curriculum. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据