ABSTRACT
PURPOSE Notions of trust are foundational to competency-based medical education. “Entrustability” underlies assessment; assessment is guided by integration into curricula of learners’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes (k/s/a). However, attitudinal notions of trust are not commonly conceptualized as integral to such frameworks. Overlap between concepts of entrustability and trust as an attitude creates opportunity to infuse trust into competency frameworks.
We explored how an original bedside cardiac assessment (BCA) curriculum that supported professional attitudes, knowledge, and skills scaffolded clinical learning in a cohort of internal medicine clerkship students.
METHODS The curriculum urged students to hear patients’ perspectives with humility and as key to diagnostic reasoning. Assigned short videos preceded two facilitated classes that included discussing a patient’s startling question, “Why should I trust your clinical skills?” and recognizing, in simulated clinical encounters, disparate patients’ perspectives.
To better understand their experiences, we asked sixty-seven students to complete two post-class open-ended questions. We analyzed responses using content and thematic analyses.
RESULTS Emergent codes clustered around themes in two categories: “Successful Learning” around effective learning strategies and meaningful peer encounters, skills practice, and educator encounters; and “Opportunities for Improvement,” around instructional design, learning preferences, and instruction-related improvements.
CONCLUSION Themes suggested effective learning and meaningful interactions. Comments affirmed the importance of attitudinal aspects of skills development; human interaction while learning; and humility, a linchpin of expertise development and patient-centered communication. All contribute to professional identity formation (PIF). Instructional design improvements were incorporated into the final version of the curriculum. Limitations included inability to examine nuances of emergent themes from the limited data set.
We are studying the curriculum’s effects on BCA-related k/s/a and trust-worthiness as a learning construct. Research opportunities include impacts on humility, patient-centeredness, and PIF. We hope this exploratory work will stimulate conversations around expanded roles of notions of trust in medical education.
Introduction The patient–doctor relationship is built upon trust in the doctor’s knowledge, skills, and attitudes (k/s/a). In this study, we explored medical students’ experience of participating in a curriculum that encouraged them to explore the “attitudes” domain related to humility and trust (“Why should I trust your clinical skills?”) while learning to care for patients with heart problems.
Methods We used an educational approach that sees learning as meaningful, not simply knowledge to be absorbed. To better understand students’ experience of participating in an early version of the curriculum, we asked sixty-seven students to complete two open-ended questions after classes. We analyzed their responses looking for recurring themes.
Results Thematic analysis suggested that learning strategies were effective and that learning with peers, skills practice, and interacting with educators were meaningful. The analysis also suggested several opportunities for improvement.
Discussion Students reported that human interaction, that is, learning in the attitudes domain, meaningfully contributed to successful learning. In particular, humility is key to patient-centered communication and building trust. All of this suggests the curriculum may help students develop identities as trustworthy professionals. Limitations of this paper include inability to explore nuances of themes from the limited data set. We hope that this exploratory work will stimulate conversations around expanded roles of trust in medical education.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
An Education Pilot grant from the BUMC Faculty Development Committee funded part of this study. Our work was also partially supported with resources from VA Bedford, VA Boston, the New England Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, and the Bedford VA Research Corporation, Inc.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Boston University Medical Center Institutional Review Board (IRB) reviewed the research and made the determination that it was not human subjects research and therefore had no requirement to obtain consent, IRB Number: H-42353, Jan. 10, 2022. This work was reviewed by the VA Bedford Healthcare System IRB and determined not to require its oversight.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos