| Literature DB >> 23762002 |
Fabrizio Consorti1, Mariagiovanna Notarangelo, Laura Potasso, Emanuele Toscano.
Abstract
Developing and assessing professionalism in medical students is an international challenge. This paper, based on preliminary research at the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry of the University Sapienza of Rome, Italy, briefly summarizes the main issues and experiences in developing professionalism among Italian undergraduate medical students. It concludes with a proposed framework suited to the Italian medical curricula. In our educational system, professionalism is defined as the context of medical expertise, the combination of rules, conditions, and meanings in which the act of health care occurs, as well as the ability of critical reflection on technical expertise. It is a multidimensional construct of ethical, sociocultural, relational, and epistemological competencies, requiring a wide range of tools for assessment. With reference to Italian versions of validated tools of measure, vignettes, videos, and a student's portfolio of reflective writings, this paper outlines the manner in which education for professionalism is embedded in the existing curriculum and overall framework of assessment.Entities:
Keywords: professionalism; tools for assessment; undergraduate medical education
Year: 2012 PMID: 23762002 PMCID: PMC3650871 DOI: 10.2147/AMEP.S31228
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Med Educ Pract ISSN: 1179-7258
The stream of methodology courses at the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry of Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
| Year/semester | Course and main subjects |
|---|---|
| 1°/I | Basic methodology – human sciences 1: Introduction to medicine |
| – Epidemiology | |
| – Clinical psychology | |
| – Internal medicine/general surgery | |
| 1°/II | Basic methodology – human sciences 2: Epistemology |
| – Epidemiology and statistics | |
| – Physics and biochemistry | |
| 2°/I | Basic methodology – human sciences 3: history of medicine and physician–patient relationship |
| – History of medicine and bioethics | |
| – Clinical psychology | |
| 2°/II | Clinical methodology 1: logic, clinical reasoning, Bioethics |
| – History of medicine and bioethics | |
| – Introduction to clinical medicine | |
| 3°/I | Clinical methodology 2: introduction to experimental medicine |
| – Epidemiology | |
| – Introduction to clinical medicine | |
| 3°/II | Clinical methodology 3: physical examination and introduction to critical thinking |
| – Introduction to clinical medicine | |
| 4°/I | Integrated methodology 1: hygiene 1 |
| – Hygiene | |
| – Infectious diseases | |
| – Respiratory diseases | |
| 4°/II | Integrated methodology 1: hygiene 2 |
| – Hygiene | |
| – Oncology | |
| – Gastroenterology | |
| – Endocrinology | |
| 5°/I | Methodology in public health 1: medicine of work |
| – Medicine of work | |
| 6°/I | Methodology in public health 2: health caremanagement |
| – Health care management | |
| 6°/II | Methodology in forensic medicine |
| – Forensic medicine | |
| – Bioethics |
Examples of learning objectives identified as relevant in the framework of professionalism for the stream of methodology courses at the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry of Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
| Course and main subjects | Examples of relevant objectives |
|---|---|
| Basic methodology – human sciences 1: introduction to medicine | To discuss |
| – The historical evolution of the concept of health and disease | |
| – The perception of health and disease in migrant people | |
| – Physician–patient relationship in different context | |
| Basic methodology – human sciences 2: epistemology | To distinguish between “difficult” and “complex” problems |
| To suggest types of solution for complex problems | |
| Basic methodology – human sciences 3: history of medicine and physician–patient relationship | To frame in a historical perspective the main theoreticand technical development of medicine |
| To discuss the cultural factors which affect the practice of medicineand the models of disease | |
| To describe the behavior of a physician observed in a clinical encounter | |
| Clinical methodology 1: logic, clinical reasoning, bioethics | To critically discuss the ethical implications in a clinical case |
| To assess the lifestyle of a patient during history taking | |
| Clinical methodology 2: introduction to experimental medicine | To describe the design and implementation of clinical research |
| To take a history from a patient according to the rules of good communication | |
| To show attitude to reflective thinking in writings on the first clinical experience | |
| Clinical methodology 3: physical examination and introduction to critical thinking | To discuss the characteristics of errors in medicine by critically reviewing simulated decisional processes |
| Integrated methodology 1: hygiene 1 | To discuss the use of different kinds of health care facilities in casesof infectious and respiratory diseases |
| Integrated methodology 1: hygiene 2 | To discuss the use of different kinds of health care facilities in cases of oncology, gastroenterology, endocrinology |
| Methodology in public health 1: medicine of work | To discuss the relationship between communication media and peoplewith regard to health: social perception of risk |
| Methodology in public health 2: health care management | To show cultural competence in relationships with patients of different ethnic origin |
| Methodology in forensic medicine | To identify duties and rights of physicians in different situations |
| – Forensic medicine | To define functions and structure of the college of physicians |
| – Bioethics | To show awareness of the contents of the code of professional Ethics of Italian physicians |
| To discuss the concepts of euthanasia and overtreatment |
Structure and psychometric characteristics of the three instruments, translated and adapted for Italy
| Objective | Structure | Cronbach’s α | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sociocultural Attitudes in Medicine Inventory (SAMI) | To measure the sensitivity and knowledge of the impact that sociocultural factors have in the process of care | Self-administered questionnaire, 26 items, 4-point Likert scale | 0.84 |
| Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE) | To measure the personal attitude toward empathic behavior and opinions that the respondent has towards the importance of empathic communication in the process of health care | Self-administered questionnaire, 20 items, 7-point Likert scale | 0.79 |
| Nijmegen Professionalism Scale (NPS) | To analyze professional behavior according to four sections: in relation to patients, to other professionals, to society, to ourselves. NPS was created as a grid of observation for tutors in general medicine, but it was adapted by the authors for the exploration of personal attitudes | Self-administered questionnaire, 106 items, 4-point Likert scale. The version used in this study was reduced to 40 items, divided into four sections | 0.83 |
Figure 1The adaptation of the pyramid of Miller model to assess professionalism. (A) Examples of objectives relevant to progressive levels of professional competence. (B) Examples of pertinent assessment tools.
Abbreviations: HC, health care; MCQs, multiple-choice questions; P-MEX, Professionalism Mini Evaluation Exercise.