E Kate Reed1,2, Katherine A Johansen Taber3, Therese Ingram Nissen1,2, Suzanna Schott1,2, Lynn O Dowling4,2, James C O'Leary5, Joan A Scott1. 1. National Coalition for Health Professional Education in Genetics, Lutherville, Maryland, USA. 2. Current affiliation: Department of Clinical and Continuing Education, The Jackson Laboratories, Bar Harbor, Maine, USA (E.K.R., T.I.N., and S.S.); Dowling Associates, San Diego, California, USA (L.O.D.). 3. Division of Science and Biotechnology, American Medical Association, Chicago, Illinois, USA. 4. Genomic Medicine Institute, El Camino Hospital, Mountain View, California, USA. 5. Genetic Alliance, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Education of practicing health professionals is likely to be one factor that will speed appropriate integration of genomics into routine clinical practice. Yet many health professionals, including physicians, find it difficult to keep up with the rapid pace of clinical genomic advances and are often uncomfortable using genomic information in practice. METHODS: Having identified the genomics educational needs of physicians in a Silicon Valley-area community hospital, we developed, implemented, and evaluated an educational course entitled Medicine's Future: Genomics for Practicing Doctors. The course structure and approach were based on best practices in adult learning, including interactivity, case-based learning, skill-focused objectives, and sequential monthly modules. RESULTS: Approximately 20-30 physicians attended each module. They demonstrated significant gains in genomics knowledge and confidence in practice skills that were sustained throughout and following the course. Six months following the course, the majority of participants reported that they had changed their practice to incorporate skills learned during the course. CONCLUSION: We believe the adult-learning principles underlying the development and delivery of Medicine's Future were responsible for participants' outcomes. These principles form a model for the development and delivery of other genomics educational programs for health professionals.Genet Med 18 7, 737-745.
PURPOSE: Education of practicing health professionals is likely to be one factor that will speed appropriate integration of genomics into routine clinical practice. Yet many health professionals, including physicians, find it difficult to keep up with the rapid pace of clinical genomic advances and are often uncomfortable using genomic information in practice. METHODS: Having identified the genomics educational needs of physicians in a Silicon Valley-area community hospital, we developed, implemented, and evaluated an educational course entitled Medicine's Future: Genomics for Practicing Doctors. The course structure and approach were based on best practices in adult learning, including interactivity, case-based learning, skill-focused objectives, and sequential monthly modules. RESULTS: Approximately 20-30 physicians attended each module. They demonstrated significant gains in genomics knowledge and confidence in practice skills that were sustained throughout and following the course. Six months following the course, the majority of participants reported that they had changed their practice to incorporate skills learned during the course. CONCLUSION: We believe the adult-learning principles underlying the development and delivery of Medicine's Future were responsible for participants' outcomes. These principles form a model for the development and delivery of other genomics educational programs for health professionals.Genet Med 18 7, 737-745.
Authors: Karina L Brierley; Danielle Campfield; Whitney Ducaine; Lindsay Dohany; Talia Donenberg; Kristen Shannon; Robin C Schwartz; Ellen T Matloff Journal: Conn Med Date: 2010-08
Authors: Julio Frenk; Lincoln Chen; Zulfiqar A Bhutta; Jordan Cohen; Nigel Crisp; Timothy Evans; Harvey Fineberg; Patricia Garcia; Yang Ke; Patrick Kelley; Barry Kistnasamy; Afaf Meleis; David Naylor; Ariel Pablos-Mendez; Srinath Reddy; Susan Scrimshaw; Jaime Sepulveda; David Serwadda; Huda Zurayk Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-11-26 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Spyridon S Marinopoulos; Todd Dorman; Neda Ratanawongsa; Lisa M Wilson; Bimal H Ashar; Jeffrey L Magaziner; Redonda G Miller; Patricia A Thomas; Gregory P Prokopowicz; Rehan Qayyum; Eric B Bass Journal: Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) Date: 2007-01
Authors: June C Carroll; Brenda J Wilson; Judith Allanson; Jeremy Grimshaw; Sean M Blaine; Wendy S Meschino; Joanne A Permaul; Ian D Graham Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2011-07-10 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Cecelia A Bellcross; Katherine Kolor; Katrina A B Goddard; Ralph J Coates; Michele Reyes; Muin J Khoury Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Elisa Jf Houwink; Scheltus J van Luijk; Lidewij Henneman; Cees van der Vleuten; Geert Jan Dinant; Martina C Cornel Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2011-02-17 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Elisa J F Houwink; Sarah R van Teeffelen; Arno M M Muijtjens; Lidewij Henneman; Florijn Jacobi; Scheltus J van Luijk; Geert Jan Dinant; Cees van der Vleuten; Martina C Cornel Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Jennifer L St Sauver; Suzette J Bielinski; Janet E Olson; Elizabeth J Bell; Michaela E Mc Gree; Debra J Jacobson; Jennifer B McCormick; Pedro J Caraballo; Paul Y Takahashi; Veronique L Roger; Carolyn R Rohrer Vitek Journal: Am J Med Date: 2016-05-05 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Catherine Hajek; Allison M Hutchinson; Lauren N Galbraith; Robert C Green; Michael F Murray; Natasha Petry; Charlene L Preys; Carrie L B Zawatsky; Emilie S Zoltick; Kurt D Christensen Journal: Genet Med Date: 2021-11-30 Impact factor: 8.864
Authors: Brittany Harding; Colleen Webber; Lucia Rühland; Nancy Dalgarno; Christine Armour; Richard Birtwhistle; Glenn Brown; June C Carroll; Michael Flavin; Susan P Phillips; Jennifer J MacKenzie Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 2.463