Effectiveness of oncogenetics training on general practitioners' consultation skills: a randomized controlled trial

Contains fulltext : 137892.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)PURPOSE: General practitioners are increasingly called upon to deliver genetic services and could play a key role in translating potentially life-saving advancements in oncogenetic technologies to patient care. If general practitioners are to make an effective contribution in this area, their genetics competencies need to be upgraded. The aim of this study was to investigate whether oncogenetics training for general practitioners improves their genetic consultation skills. METHODS: In this pragmatic, blinded, randomized controlled trial, the intervention consisted of a 4-h training (December 2011 and April 2012), covering oncogenetic consultation skills (family history, familial risk assessment, and efficient referral), attitude (medical ethical issues), and clinical knowledge required in primary-care consultations. Outcomes were measured using observation checklists by unannounced standardized patients and self-reported questionnaires. RESULTS: Of 88 randomized general practitioners who initially agreed to participate, 56 completed all measurements. Key consultation skills significantly and substantially improved; regression coefficients after intervention were equivalent to 0.34 and 0.28 at 3-month follow-up, indicating a moderate effect size. Satisfaction and perceived applicability of newly learned skills were highly scored. CONCLUSION: The general practitioner-specific training proved to be a feasible, satisfactory, and clinically applicable method to improve oncogenetics consultation skills and could be used as an educational framework to inform future training activities with the ultimate aim of improving medical care

Accounting Professionals’ Ethical Judgment and the Institutional Disciplinary Context: A French–US Comparison

International audienceThis paper investigates whether one aspect of the national institutional context (namely the disciplinary process of the accounting profession) may be associated with accounting professionals' ethical judgment, in France and the United States. For each country our study seeks to find if there is a link between the ethical judgment of accounting professionals and the disciplinary context, then we make a comparative analysis between the two nations. Our findings suggest that the judgment of the American accounting professionals is more influenced by the disciplinary decisions of the accountancy board. Conversely, the judgment of French accounting professionals seems to be more independent of the disciplinary context. Beyond the differences between the two countries, our results also show some common points; in both countries women tend to judge misconduct more severely than men. We then discuss these results by highlighting some characteristics of the legal systems (such as the facility of the procedure and the publication of sanctions), and that of the national culture (mainly the perception of the law and its link to ethics) which may account for the differences between the two nations. We conclude by identifying implications for the regulation of the accounting profession