really good stuff understanding in relation to a specific subject. The Virtual Human is composed of video sequences combining anatomy, physiology and morphology in the contexts of various diseases. Video sequences are available for many disciplines, including dermatology, and there is capacity to produce anatomical structures using a 3-D printer. Despite the incredible range of potential applications for the Virtual Human, few studies have assessed students’ perceptions of its use. What was tried? We conducted a study that aimed to assess medical students’ perceptions of the Virtual Human inserted into a TBL session about leprosy. Sequences entitled ‘Clinical Manifestations of Leprosy’ and ‘Leprosy Neuropathy’ were chosen for this study. A TBL session was conducted with 42 medical students in their third year of study (in the clinical phase of the curriculum) and was structured as follows: individual study (pre-class); individual readiness assurance test (iRAT); instructor’s summary of the subject; video sequences; team readiness assurance test (tRAT), and team clinical case resolution. At the end of the session, students were invited to share their opinions and perceptions of the Virtual Human and to summarise their experience in a few words by completing an evaluation form. What lessons were learned? Students’ forms were tabulated to identify the most commonly cited expressions in relation to their experiences with the Virtual Human. The Virtual Human was considered to help memorisation by 28.6% of students, to allow visualisation and revision of anatomic structures by 11.9%, to be illustrative by 31.0%, to facilitate fast understanding by 33.3%, to enhance the didactic aspects of the class by 31.0%, to assist with learning by 42.9%, to help students understand the physiopathology of the disease by 11.9%, to be practical by 19.1%, and to be stimulating or interesting by 35.7%. Other factors cited by students were innovation, enthusiasm and motivation, usefulness, clarity, and the resolution of objectives and doubts. Visual resources are useful tools for medical students, given their frequent need to imagine the anatomical structures and microorganisms in the human body, and help students to understand and memorise disease mechanisms. In conclusion, iconographic resources, such as the Virtual Human, can be used to complement TBL sessions and to help students remain interested and motivated, thereby facilitating a more complete learning experience. REFERENCE 1 Parmelee D, Michaelsen LK, Cook S, Hudes PD. Team-based learning: a practical guide: AMEE Guide No. 65. Med Teach 2012;34 (5):e275–87.
532
Correspondence: Cristiane Comparin, Dermatology Department, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul Teaching Hospital, Av. Sen. Filinto M€ uller, S/N, Vila Ipiranga, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul 79090-190, Brazil. Tel: 00 55 67 3201 8000; E-mail: [email protected] doi: 10.1111/medu.12716
Devising regional trainee initiatives to promote research Mitchell Burden, Peter D Mooney, Karna Dev Bardhan, Matthew Kurien & David S Sanders What problems were addressed? The aim of those who undertake research is to present their work at a national or international meeting and ultimately to publish in a peer-reviewed journal. Rates of full publication for members of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) have been shown to be in the range of 20.4–55.9%.1 However, the trend over a 15-year period suggests a decline in full publication rates.1 The success of a meeting can be equated to the proportion of its abstracts that go on to be published in peer-reviewed journals and hence the decline in publication rates represents a problem that should be addressed by both individual meetings and the field as a whole. What was tried? In order to tackle this issue of faltering research, a regional research meeting, called the Bardhan Fellowship, was set up for South Yorkshire (UK) gastroenterology trainees. Trainees were invited to present items of research they had recently carried out, which were then ranked by audience peer review; the author(s) of the highest ranking of the top three presentations was rewarded with a monetary prize. Between 2003 and 2012, 112 abstracts were presented at the meeting. Each of these was traced using the MEDLINE database to find out if it had been subsequently published. Analysis of data generated by this tracing of abstracts showed that 37 (33%) abstracts had been published in full in peer-reviewed journals and 75 had either never been completed or had remained in abstract form. Of the 32 abstracts placed in the top three presentations at their respective meetings, 24 (75%) had been published, as had 13 (16%) of the 80 which had not been ranked in the top three (p < 0.0001). The median impact factor of the journals in which the abstracts were published was 4.061 for the ranked group and 2.865 for the unranked group (Mann–Whitney test, p < 0.05).
ª 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. MEDICAL EDUCATION 2015; 49: 513–541
really good stuff What lessons were learned? This is the first time a regional specialty meeting has been evaluated in the UK. In terms of overall abstract publication rate, the data show that the rate of publication of research presented at the Bardhan Fellowship (33%) is comparable with that of other national gastroenterology conferences, such as that of the BSG. Trainees whose work is ranked in the top three items at their respective meetings are significantly more likely to publish their work in peer-reviewed journals and are also more likely to publish in a journal with a higher impact factor and in less time. Hence it is recommended that a competitive peer review process is included in similar initiatives. Evaluative feedback from those who attended the conferences confirmed that the meeting was educationally beneficial and generally enjoyed. Regional meetings can act as ‘friendly’ environments in which trainees can improve their presentation skills and stimulate others to consider undertaking a formal period of research, which, it is hoped, may be to the wider benefit of the field. We would recommend deanery support for any future initiatives. REFERENCE 1 Sanders DS, Carter MJ, Hurlstone DP, Lobo AJ, Hoggard N. Research outcomes in British gastroenterology: an audit of the subsequent full publication of abstracts presented at the British Society of Gastroenterology. Gut 2001;49 (1):154–5. Correspondence: Peter D Mooney, Regional Gastrointestinal and Liver Unit, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield S10 2JF, UK. Tel: 00 44 7789 374457; E-mail: [email protected] doi: 10.1111/medu.12705
Mentor Match for physician-faculty: the search for ‘Dr Right’ Guadalupe Martinez & Kenneth Knox What problem was addressed? Finding an appropriate mentor is critical to academic physician development. However, finding the best match is challenging.1 Experts advise junior faculty mentees to do a significant amount of legwork, such as asking colleagues to connect them to others with similar interests or researching the backgrounds of numerous potential mentors to determine their availability and suitability. Another inherent challenge refers to the fact that both mentors and mentees are likely to
be unfamiliar with mentoring pools. Clearly, new strategies that ease the time burden imposed and permit the broadening of searches are required. Our Department of Medicine’s six-member mentoring committee spearheaded a needs assessment targeting assistant professor-level academic physicians. As expected, mentees reported a desire for greater assistance with the search and match process. Mentees also reported a lack of knowledge about available mentors and their areas of expertise, and difficulty in establishing contact and obtaining a true commitment from senior physician faculty. The committee began a process of weekly deliberation on how to augment the search and match process for our junior mentees. What was tried? Despite word of mouth and e-mail reminders that the mentoring programme was important and mandatory, the programme remained informal and sparsely utilised. We piloted a systematic approach utilising compatibility algorithm software, Mentor Match (Intrafinity, Inc., Toronto, ON, Canada.), which functions much like an online dating service. In January 2012, Mentor Match went live to internally connect over 119 mentors and junior faculty mentees. Faculty members could access participant profiles, mentorship contract templates and mentor programme guidelines. Mentor Match software then lists the top compatible mentors based on participants’ backgrounds and shared professional interests. What lessons were learned? Post-implementation assessments revealed important usage patterns among mentees. The vast majority found the software to be user-friendly and would use the software for ongoing searches. Over half reported primarily using the software to search for potential mentors both within and outside the department. Fewer than 10% reported primary usage of the software to expand their professional peer network. Although mentees considered the recommended list of potential mentors from Mentor Match in their match decision, just over half reported negotiating their primary mentor selection with their division chief’s recommendations. The high percentage of negotiated primary mentorships suggests that our junior faculty members value combining computergenerated and colleague recommendations. However, this trend raised questions about the effectiveness of using compatibility programs without input from division leaders. The consequences of failure to address barriers to mentorship include not only poor participation in the mentoring programme, but also a negative impact on faculty recruitment and retention. Mentoring is an important and time-honoured
ª 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. MEDICAL EDUCATION 2015; 49: 513–541
533
Copyright of Medical Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
532
Correspondence: Cristiane Comparin, Dermatology Department, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul Teaching Hospital, Av. Sen. Filinto M€ uller, S/N, Vila Ipiranga, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul 79090-190, Brazil. Tel: 00 55 67 3201 8000; E-mail: [email protected] doi: 10.1111/medu.12716
Devising regional trainee initiatives to promote research Mitchell Burden, Peter D Mooney, Karna Dev Bardhan, Matthew Kurien & David S Sanders What problems were addressed? The aim of those who undertake research is to present their work at a national or international meeting and ultimately to publish in a peer-reviewed journal. Rates of full publication for members of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) have been shown to be in the range of 20.4–55.9%.1 However, the trend over a 15-year period suggests a decline in full publication rates.1 The success of a meeting can be equated to the proportion of its abstracts that go on to be published in peer-reviewed journals and hence the decline in publication rates represents a problem that should be addressed by both individual meetings and the field as a whole. What was tried? In order to tackle this issue of faltering research, a regional research meeting, called the Bardhan Fellowship, was set up for South Yorkshire (UK) gastroenterology trainees. Trainees were invited to present items of research they had recently carried out, which were then ranked by audience peer review; the author(s) of the highest ranking of the top three presentations was rewarded with a monetary prize. Between 2003 and 2012, 112 abstracts were presented at the meeting. Each of these was traced using the MEDLINE database to find out if it had been subsequently published. Analysis of data generated by this tracing of abstracts showed that 37 (33%) abstracts had been published in full in peer-reviewed journals and 75 had either never been completed or had remained in abstract form. Of the 32 abstracts placed in the top three presentations at their respective meetings, 24 (75%) had been published, as had 13 (16%) of the 80 which had not been ranked in the top three (p < 0.0001). The median impact factor of the journals in which the abstracts were published was 4.061 for the ranked group and 2.865 for the unranked group (Mann–Whitney test, p < 0.05).
ª 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. MEDICAL EDUCATION 2015; 49: 513–541
really good stuff What lessons were learned? This is the first time a regional specialty meeting has been evaluated in the UK. In terms of overall abstract publication rate, the data show that the rate of publication of research presented at the Bardhan Fellowship (33%) is comparable with that of other national gastroenterology conferences, such as that of the BSG. Trainees whose work is ranked in the top three items at their respective meetings are significantly more likely to publish their work in peer-reviewed journals and are also more likely to publish in a journal with a higher impact factor and in less time. Hence it is recommended that a competitive peer review process is included in similar initiatives. Evaluative feedback from those who attended the conferences confirmed that the meeting was educationally beneficial and generally enjoyed. Regional meetings can act as ‘friendly’ environments in which trainees can improve their presentation skills and stimulate others to consider undertaking a formal period of research, which, it is hoped, may be to the wider benefit of the field. We would recommend deanery support for any future initiatives. REFERENCE 1 Sanders DS, Carter MJ, Hurlstone DP, Lobo AJ, Hoggard N. Research outcomes in British gastroenterology: an audit of the subsequent full publication of abstracts presented at the British Society of Gastroenterology. Gut 2001;49 (1):154–5. Correspondence: Peter D Mooney, Regional Gastrointestinal and Liver Unit, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield S10 2JF, UK. Tel: 00 44 7789 374457; E-mail: [email protected] doi: 10.1111/medu.12705
Mentor Match for physician-faculty: the search for ‘Dr Right’ Guadalupe Martinez & Kenneth Knox What problem was addressed? Finding an appropriate mentor is critical to academic physician development. However, finding the best match is challenging.1 Experts advise junior faculty mentees to do a significant amount of legwork, such as asking colleagues to connect them to others with similar interests or researching the backgrounds of numerous potential mentors to determine their availability and suitability. Another inherent challenge refers to the fact that both mentors and mentees are likely to
be unfamiliar with mentoring pools. Clearly, new strategies that ease the time burden imposed and permit the broadening of searches are required. Our Department of Medicine’s six-member mentoring committee spearheaded a needs assessment targeting assistant professor-level academic physicians. As expected, mentees reported a desire for greater assistance with the search and match process. Mentees also reported a lack of knowledge about available mentors and their areas of expertise, and difficulty in establishing contact and obtaining a true commitment from senior physician faculty. The committee began a process of weekly deliberation on how to augment the search and match process for our junior mentees. What was tried? Despite word of mouth and e-mail reminders that the mentoring programme was important and mandatory, the programme remained informal and sparsely utilised. We piloted a systematic approach utilising compatibility algorithm software, Mentor Match (Intrafinity, Inc., Toronto, ON, Canada.), which functions much like an online dating service. In January 2012, Mentor Match went live to internally connect over 119 mentors and junior faculty mentees. Faculty members could access participant profiles, mentorship contract templates and mentor programme guidelines. Mentor Match software then lists the top compatible mentors based on participants’ backgrounds and shared professional interests. What lessons were learned? Post-implementation assessments revealed important usage patterns among mentees. The vast majority found the software to be user-friendly and would use the software for ongoing searches. Over half reported primarily using the software to search for potential mentors both within and outside the department. Fewer than 10% reported primary usage of the software to expand their professional peer network. Although mentees considered the recommended list of potential mentors from Mentor Match in their match decision, just over half reported negotiating their primary mentor selection with their division chief’s recommendations. The high percentage of negotiated primary mentorships suggests that our junior faculty members value combining computergenerated and colleague recommendations. However, this trend raised questions about the effectiveness of using compatibility programs without input from division leaders. The consequences of failure to address barriers to mentorship include not only poor participation in the mentoring programme, but also a negative impact on faculty recruitment and retention. Mentoring is an important and time-honoured
ª 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. MEDICAL EDUCATION 2015; 49: 513–541
533
Copyright of Medical Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
