scholarly journals DEEPENING THE MEDICAL COMPETENCE OF CITIZENS AS A CONDITION FOR ENSURING THEIR READINESS FOR EPIDEMIC THREATS

Author(s):  
M. Makarenko
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Marie Giroux ◽  
Luce Pélissier-Simard

AbstractSome highly challenging, seemingly “unsolvable” situations that arise in medical education could be the result of autistic traits (AT) in learners. AT exist in physicians and learners, ranging from profiles compatible with DSM-5’s criteria for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to more subtle manifestations of ASD’s “broader phenotype.” Often associated with strengths and talents, AT may nonetheless pose significant challenges for learning, teaching, and practising medicine. Since AT remain widely under-recognized and misunderstood by educators, clinicians, and affected individuals alike, they represent a blind spot in medical education. The use of a “neurodiversity lens” to examine challenging situations may help educators consider different pedagogical approaches to address those potentially stemming from AT.This paper aims to raise awareness and understanding of AT-related difficulties in struggling medical learners. To overcome the blind spot challenge and help develop this “neurodiversity lens,” we explore different angles. Beyond any diagnostic consideration, we offer a series of contextual examples, paralleled with explanatory concepts from the field of ASD. We also underline the role of context on functional impact and describe the often ill-defined pattern of challenges encountered, as well as the fertile grounds for interpersonal misunderstandings and disrespect. We propose historical, cultural, and clinical reasons likely contributing to the blind spot. Mindful of the potential risks of prejudice associated with identifying AT-related difficulties, we underline the necessity and feasibility of conciliating diversity and dignity with accountability standards for medical competence.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. e240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joachim Paul Hasebrook ◽  
Jürgen Hinkelmann ◽  
Thomas Volkert ◽  
Sibyll Rodde ◽  
Klaus Hahnenkamp

Author(s):  
Alex Broadbent

Philosophy of Medicine seeks to answer two questions: (1) what is medicine? and (2) what should we think of it? The first question is motivated by the observation that medicine has existed and continues to exist in many different forms in different times and places. There is no activity or belief that is common to all medical traditions in all times and places. What, if anything, makes us count these activities as varieties of the same thing—namely, medicine? The book distinguishes the goal and business of medicine, arguing that the goal is cure, while the business of medicine cannot be, because medical traditions have been too hit-and-miss at achieving cure. The core medical competence is identified as engaging with the project of understanding the nature and causes of disease. A model of health is also required to say what medicine is, since health is part of its subject matter, and a novel theory of health as a secondary property is offered. In the second part of the book, the proper epistemic attitude to medicine is considered. Contrary to much contemporary work, the book argues against positions setting very rigid constraints on what counts as admissible evidence in forming beliefs either about whole traditions or about specific interventions. Thus both Evidence-Based Medicine and Medical Nihilism are rejected. Instead a view called Medical Cosmopolitanism is developed from Appiah’s corresponding work in ethics. The view is applied to alternative and non-Mainstream traditions, as well as to the project of decolonizing medicine.


2012 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Drew M. Keister ◽  
Daniel Larson ◽  
Julie Dostal ◽  
Jay Baglia

Abstract Background Despite the movement toward competency-based assessment by accrediting bodies in recent years, there is no consensus on how to best assess medical competence. Direct observation is a useful tool. At the same time, a comprehensive assessment system based on direct observation has been difficult to develop. Intervention We developed a system that translates data obtained from checklists of observed behaviors completed during educational activities, including direct observation of clinical care, into a graphic tool (the “radar graph”) usable for both formative and summative assessment. Using unique, observable behaviors to evaluate levels of competency on the Dreyfus scale, we assessed resident performance in 6 learning sites within our residency. Data are represented on a radar graph, which residents and faculty used to recognize both strengths and areas for growth to guide educational planning for the individual learner. Results Initial data show that the radar graphs have construct validity because the development process accurately reflects the desired construct, assessors were adequately trained, and the radar graphs demonstrated resident growth over time. A form completion rate of 90% for >1500 disseminated assessments suggests the feasibility of our process. Conclusions The radar graph is a promising tool for use in resident feedback and competency assessment. Further research is needed to determine the full utility of the radar graphs, including a better understanding of the tool's reliability and construct validity.


JAMA ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 242 (21) ◽  
pp. 2286
Author(s):  
Barry Stimmel
Keyword(s):  

JAMA ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 242 (21) ◽  
pp. 2286
Author(s):  
Patrick J. McGovern
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document