4.2 Article

You are in Some Sort of Occupational Adolescence: An Exploratory Study to Understand Knowledge, Skills, and Experiences of CanMEDS Leader Role in Psychiatry

期刊

ACADEMIC PSYCHIATRY
卷 44, 期 2, 页码 184-191

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s40596-019-01162-3

关键词

CanMEDS; Leader; Leadership; Psychiatry; Medical education; Residents; Training

资金

  1. Education Development Fund, University of Toronto

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective The study explored knowledge, attitude, and practices of Canadian Medical Education Directions for Specialists (CanMEDS) 'Leader role in faculty psychiatrists in a university setting. Methods This is a qualitative study using a thematic analysis approach. Participants were identified by purposive, convenience, and snowball sampling. Telephone interviews were conducted to explore participants' perceptions of leadership. Qualitative analysis was carried out using a constant comparative analysis approach to identify themes across the interview data. Data was transcribed and coded into themes and categories to form an analysis of physicians' knowledge, attitude, and practices of the CanMEDS Leader role. Results Twenty-eight faculty psychiatrists participated in the study. The following themes and subthemes emerged from analysis: (a) characteristics of leadership and lack of clarity regarding CanMEDS Leader role (subthemes: differences between manager and leader, lack of specificity and practicality, relevance to practice) and (b) the meaning of leadership (subthemes: positional leadership and everyday leadership, physician as team leader, developing leadership skills, getting beyond occupational adolescence). Conclusion Participants perceived CanMEDS Leader role description as a high-level vision, which needs practice-oriented guidance. Participants conceptualized the dual nature of physician leadership at an individual level and at an organizational level. Leadership training is important both in residency as well as lifelong learning.

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

4.2
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