| Literature DB >> 28460606 |
Bonnie Olivia Hughes1, Mosa Moshabela1,2, Jenni Owen3, Bernhard Gaede1,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The community-based medical education curriculum is growing in popularity as a strategy to bring universal health coverage to underserved communities by providing medical students with hands-on training in primary health care. Accommodation and immersion of medical students within the community will become increasingly important to the success of community-based curricula. In the context of tourism, homestays, where local families host guests, have shown to provide an immersive accommodation experience.Entities:
Keywords: Community-based education; cultural exchange; homestay; student accommodation; undergraduate medical education
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28460606 PMCID: PMC5419295 DOI: 10.1080/10872981.2017.1320185
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Educ Online ISSN: 1087-2981
Quality assessment.
| Study type | Methodological quality criteria |
|---|---|
| All study designs | Are there clear research questions/objectives? |
| Do the data collected allow research questions to be appropriately addressed? | |
| Qualitative studies | Are the sources of data relevant to address the research question? |
| Is the process for analyzing data relevant to address the research question? | |
| Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the context, e.g. the setting in which the data were collected? | |
| Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the researcher’s influence, e.g. through their interactions with participants? | |
| Quantitative studies | Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the research questions? |
| Is the sample representative of the population under the study? | |
| Are measurements appropriate (clear origin or validity known or standard instrument)? | |
| Is there an acceptable response rate (60% or more)? | |
| Mixed methods | Is the mixed methods design relevant to address the qualitative and quantitative research questions? |
| Is the integration of qualitative and quantitative data relevant to address the research questions? | |
| Is appropriate consideration given to the limitations associated with this integration, e.g. the divergence of quantitative and qualitative data in a triangulation design? |
Charting of included articles.
| 1 | Date of publication |
| 2 | Location of study |
| 3 | Study population – must be students or homestay participants (i.e. hosts) |
| 4 | Study methods – what tools were used to collect data or assess educational outcomes |
| 5 | Study design – qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods |
| 6 | Length of the homestay experience being evaluated |
| 7 | Demographics of the students and hosts (i.e. are the students living in a foreign country) |
| 8 | Outcomes of the homestay experience |
| 9 | Recommendations from the researchers |
| 10 | Relevance to the educational value of homestays |
Comparison of language proficiency results.
| Comparative | Speaking | Reading | Writing | Listening | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Byun and Kim 2013 [ | Individual post-test compared topre test | Minor increase | Insignificant increase | Insignificant decrease | Insignificant increase |
| Rivers 1998 [ | Change from pr- to post-test compared todorm-stay students | Significant decrease | Significant increase | n/a | Insignificant result |
| DiSilvio et al. 2014 [ | Individual post-test compared topre-test | Significant increase | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Shiri 2015 [ | Change from pre- to post-test compared to results of otherArabic learning students | Significant increase | n/a | n/a | n/a |