Literature DB >> 30301518

"Tweet"-format reflective writing: A hidden needs assessment?

Jeremy A Dressler1, Beth A Ryder2, Kristina Monteiro3, Erin Cheschi4, Michael Connolly5, Thomas J Miner6, David T Harrington7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Medical student reflection is integral for professional development. Preliminary findings suggest that short-format writing promotes reflection and identifies impactful experiences. We sought to determine whether reflective writing could be used as a clerkship needs assessment.
METHODS: During their surgical clerkship, medical students submitted "tweet"-format reflections and completed a standardized evaluation. "Tweet" content was analyzed using modified grounded theory methods and coded by valence, content, and reflection. Sub-coding was conducted to compare feedback between "tweets" and evaluations.
RESULTS: We analyzed 286 reflections and 214 evaluation comments; 176 "tweets" were reflective (62%). "Tweets" commented on "patient interaction" (53%), "educational experience" (38%), "physician interaction" (26%), and "career decisions" (10%). A significant difference was observed between "tweets" and evaluations with regard to the number that provided feedback on experiences with "critically ill or dying patients."
CONCLUSIONS: Reflections provided real-time reactions to impactful clerkship events, notably those involving critically ill or dying patients. This focus on illness may represent an unmet need for discussions related to end of life care. Overall, reflections provided more actionable feedback compared to evaluations.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Curricular improvement; Medical student education; Reflective writing; Surgery clerkship

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30301518     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.09.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  1 in total

1.  Early introduction of the multi-disciplinary team through student Schwartz Rounds: a mixed methodology study.

Authors:  Harry Abnett; Robert Tuckwell; Lucy Evans
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2022-07-03       Impact factor: 3.263

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.