Exploring students' perceptions on the use of significant event analysis, as part of a portfolio assessment process in general practice, as a tool for learning how to use reflection in learning

BACKGROUND: Portfolio learning enables students to collect evidence of their learning. Component tasks making up a portfolio can be devised that relate directly to intended learning outcomes. Reflective tasks can stimulate students to recognise their own learning needs. Assessment of portfolios using a rating scale relating to intended learning outcomes offers high content validity. This study evaluated a reflective portfolio used during a final-year attachment in general practice (family medicine). Students were asked to evaluate the portfolio (which used significant event analysis as a basis for reflection) as a learning tool. The validity and reliability of the portfolio as an assessment tool were also measured. METHODS: 81 final-year medical students completed reflective significant event analyses as part of a portfolio created during a three-week attachment (clerkship) in general practice (family medicine). As well as two reflective significant event analyses each portfolio contained an audit and a health needs assessment. Portfolios were marked three times; by the student's GP teacher, the course organiser and by another teacher in the university department of general practice. Inter-rater reliability between pairs of markers was calculated. A questionnaire enabled the students' experience of portfolio learning to be determined. RESULTS: Benefits to learning from reflective learning were limited. Students said that they thought more about the patients they wrote up in significant event analyses but information as to the nature and effect of this was not forthcoming. Moderate inter-rater reliability (Spearman's Rho .65) was found between pairs of departmental raters dealing with larger numbers (20 – 60) of portfolios. Inter-rater reliability of marking involving GP tutors who only marked 1 – 3 portfolios was very low. Students rated highly their mentoring relationship with their GP teacher but found the portfolio tasks time-consuming. CONCLUSION: The inter-rater reliability observed in this study should be viewed alongside the high validity afforded by the authenticity of the learning tasks (compared with a sample of a student's learning taken by an exam question). Validity is enhanced by the rating scale which directly connects the grade given with intended learning outcomes. The moderate inter-rater reliability may be increased if a portfolio is completed over a longer period of time and contains more component pieces of work. The questionnaire used in this study only accessed limited information about the effect of reflection on students' learning. Qualitative methods of evaluation would determine the students experience in greater depth. It would be useful to evaluate the effects of reflective learning after students have had more time to get used to this unfamiliar method of learning and to overcome any problems in understanding the task

Therapeutic Targeting of Glioblastoma and the Interactions with Its Microenvironment

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary malignant brain tumour, and it confers a dismal prognosis despite intensive multimodal treatments. Whilst historically, research has focussed on the evolution of GBM tumour cells themselves, there is growing recognition of the importance of studying the tumour microenvironment (TME). Improved characterisation of the interaction between GBM cells and the TME has led to a better understanding of therapeutic resistance and the identification of potential targets to block these escape mechanisms. This review describes the network of cells within the TME and proposes treatment strategies for simultaneously targeting GBM cells, the surrounding immune cells, and the crosstalk between them

Use of mobile devices to help cancer patients meet their information needs in non-inpatient settings: systematic review

Background: The shift from inpatient to outpatient cancer care means that patients are now required to manage their condition at home, away from regular supervision by clinicians. Subsequently, research has consistently reported that many patients with cancer have unmet information needs during their illness. Mobile devices, such as mobile phones and tablet computers, provide an opportunity to deliver information to patients remotely. To date, no systematic reviews have evaluated how mobile devices have been used specifically to help patients meet to their information needs. Objective: A systematic review was conducted to identify studies that describe the use of mobile interventions to enable patients with cancer to meet their cancer-related information needs in non-inpatient settings, and to describe the effects and feasibility of these interventions. Methods: MEDLINE EMBASE and PsychINFO databases were searched up until January 2017. Search terms related to ‘mobile devices’, ‘information needs’ and ‘cancer’. There were no restrictions on study type in order to be as inclusive as possible. Study participants were patients with cancer undergoing treatment. Interventions had to be delivered by a mobile or handheld device, attempt to meet patients’ cancer-related information needs, and be for use in non-inpatient settings. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists were used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. A narrative synthesis was performed and findings were organised by common themes found across studies. Results: The initial search yielded 1020 results. Twenty-three articles describing 20 studies were included. Interventions aimed to improve the monitoring and management of treatment-related symptoms (n=17, 85%), directly increase patients’ knowledge related to their condition (n=2, 10%) and improve communication of symptoms to clinicians in consultations (n=1, 5%). Studies were of adult (n=17; age range 24-87 years) and adolescent (n=3; age range 8-18 years) patients. Sample sizes ranged from 4-125, with 13 studies consisting of 25 participants or less. Most studies were conducted in the UK (n=12, 52%) or US (n=7, 30%). Of the 23 articles included, twelve were of medium quality, nine were of poor quality and two were of good quality. Overall, interventions were reported to be acceptable and were perceived as useful and easy to use. Few technical problems were encountered. Adherence was generally consistent and high (periods ranged from 5 days to 6 months), however there was considerable variation in use of intervention components within and between studies. Reported benefits of the interventions included improved symptom management, patient empowerment and improved clinician-patient communication, although mixed findings were reported for patients’ health-related quality of life and anxiety. Conclusions: The current review highlighted that mobile interventions for patients with cancer are only meeting treatment or symptom-related information needs. There were no interventions designed to meet patients’ full range of cancer-related information needs, from information on psychological support to how to manage finances during cancer, and the long-term effects of treatment. More comprehensive interventions are required for patients to meet their information needs when managing their condition in non-inpatient settings. Controlled evaluations are needed to further determine the effectiveness of these types of intervention

Core information sets for informed consent to surgical interventions:baseline information of importance to patients and clinicians

Abstract Background Consent remains a crucial, yet challenging, cornerstone of clinical practice. The ethical, legal and professional understandings of this construct have evolved away from a doctor-centred act to a patient-centred process that encompasses the patient’s values, beliefs and goals. This alignment of consent with the philosophy of shared decision-making was affirmed in a recent high-profile Supreme Court ruling in England. The communication of information is central to this model of health care delivery but it can be difficult for doctors to gauge the information needs of the individual patient. The aim of this paper is to describe ‘core information sets’ which are defined as a minimum set of consensus-derived information about a given procedure to be discussed with all patients. Importantly, they are intended to catalyse discussion of subjective importance to individuals. Main body The model described in this paper applies health services research and Delphi consensus-building methods to an idea orginally proposed 30 years ago. The hypothesis is that, first, large amounts of potentially-important information are distilled down to discrete information domains. These are then, secondly, rated by key stakeholders in multiple iterations, so that core information of agreed importance can be defined. We argue that this scientific approach is key to identifying information important to all stakeholders, which may otherwise be communicated poorly or omitted from discussions entirely. Our methods apply systematic review, qualitative, survey and consensus-building techniques to define this ‘core information’. We propose that such information addresses the ‘reasonable patient’ standard for information disclosure but, more importantly, can serve as a spring board for high-value discussion of importance to the individual patient. Conclusion The application of established research methods can define information of core importance to informed consent. Further work will establish how best to incorporate this model in routine practice

Core information sets for informed consent to surgical interventions:baseline information of importance to patients and clinicians

Abstract Background Consent remains a crucial, yet challenging, cornerstone of clinical practice. The ethical, legal and professional understandings of this construct have evolved away from a doctor-centred act to a patient-centred process that encompasses the patient’s values, beliefs and goals. This alignment of consent with the philosophy of shared decision-making was affirmed in a recent high-profile Supreme Court ruling in England. The communication of information is central to this model of health care delivery but it can be difficult for doctors to gauge the information needs of the individual patient. The aim of this paper is to describe ‘core information sets’ which are defined as a minimum set of consensus-derived information about a given procedure to be discussed with all patients. Importantly, they are intended to catalyse discussion of subjective importance to individuals. Main body The model described in this paper applies health services research and Delphi consensus-building methods to an idea orginally proposed 30 years ago. The hypothesis is that, first, large amounts of potentially-important information are distilled down to discrete information domains. These are then, secondly, rated by key stakeholders in multiple iterations, so that core information of agreed importance can be defined. We argue that this scientific approach is key to identifying information important to all stakeholders, which may otherwise be communicated poorly or omitted from discussions entirely. Our methods apply systematic review, qualitative, survey and consensus-building techniques to define this ‘core information’. We propose that such information addresses the ‘reasonable patient’ standard for information disclosure but, more importantly, can serve as a spring board for high-value discussion of importance to the individual patient. Conclusion The application of established research methods can define information of core importance to informed consent. Further work will establish how best to incorporate this model in routine practice

Learning contexts at two UK medical schools: A comparative study using mixed methods

Introduction: The context in which learning takes place exerts a powerful effect on the approach learners take to their work. In some instances learners will be forced by the nature of a task to adopt a less-favoured approach. In this study, we used a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to compare the effect of context on learning at different UK medical schools. We compared schools with conventional, and problem-based curricula. Method: We had collected data from 30 interviews with third year medical students in one UK medical school with a conventional, lecture-based curriculum in relation to a previous study. The interview guide had explored effects of context and approach to learning. We used the same guide to interview 6 students in another UK medical school with a problem-based curriculum. We then put together a pack of validated questionnaires, which measured the phenomena that had emerged in the interviews. In particular we selected questionnaires which measured the criteria on which students from the different schools appeared to demonstrate greatest variance. Results: There were two areas where students from schools with differing curricula differed - basic learning activity and assessment. Students at the lecture-based school attended lectures where they received information while students at the Problem-based school attended tutorials where they stimulated prior knowledge and identified new learning objectives. Progress -testing at the problem-based school helped students gain a sense of accumulating a body of knowledge needed for their life in medicine while students' at the lecture-based school directed their learning towards passing the next set of exams. The findings from quantitative, questionnaire data correlated with the interview findings. They showed that students at a school with a PBL curriculum scored significantly higher for reflection in learning, self-efficacy in self-directed learning and for deep approach to learning. Conclusion: We set out to determine whether students at different medical schools approach their learning differently. We have succeeded in demonstrating that this is the case. The differences that we detected in learning context and approaches to learning in medical students at the two schools predict that learning at the non PBL school is likely to be via a surface approach and not integrated. These differences have major implications for the outcomes of medical student learning at the two schools in terms of accessibility and sustainability of learning

Interventions before consultations to help patients address their information needs by encouraging question asking: systematic review

Objective To assess the effects on patients, clinicians, and the healthcare system of interventions before consultations to help patients or their representatives gather information in consultations by question asking

The preferences of patients with cancer regarding an app to help them to meet their illness-related information needs: a qualitative interview study

Background: The shift from inpatient to outpatient and community cancer care means that more patients with cancer need to manage their condition at home, without the direct supervision of their clinician. Subsequently, research has reported that many patients with cancer have unmet information needs during their illness. Mobile devices, such as mobile phones and tablet computers, provide an opportunity to deliver information to patients remotely. Before designing an app intervention to help patients with cancer to meet their information needs, in-depth qualitative research is required to gain an understanding of the views of the target users. Objective: We aimed to develop an app intervention to help patients meet their illness-related information needs in noninpatient settings. This study explored the information needs of patients with cancer and their preferences for an app and desired app features. Specifically, the perceived acceptability of an app, desired app features, and the potential benefits and disadvantages of, and barriers to, an app were explored. Methods: Qualitative, one-on-one semistructured interviews were conducted with patients with urological, colorectal, breast, or gynecological cancers (N=23) across two hospitals in South Wales. Interviews were audio-taped, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic analysis. Results: Findings indicated that barriers to information exchange and understanding in consultations, and identification of reliable information sources between consultations, appeared to contribute to patients’ unmet information needs. Consequently, app feature suggestions included a question prompt list, a glossary of cancer terms, a resources feature, and a contacts feature. Anticipated benefits of this type of app included a more informed patient, improved quality of life, decreased anxiety, and increased confidence to participate in their care. The anticipated barriers to app use are likely to be temporary or can be minimized with regard to these findings during app development and implementation. Conclusions: This study highlights the desire of patients with cancer for an app intervention to help them meet their information needs during and between consultations with their clinicians. This study also highlights the anticipated acceptability and benefits of this type of intervention; however, further research is warranted

Empathy among undergraduate medical students: A multi-centre cross-sectional comparison of students beginning and approaching the end of their course

Abstract Background Although a core element in patient care the trajectory of empathy during undergraduate medical education remains unclear. Empathy is generally regarded as comprising an affective capacity: the ability to be sensitive to and concerned for, another and a cognitive capacity: the ability to understand and appreciate the other person’s perspective. The authors investigated whether final year undergraduate students recorded lower levels of empathy than their first year counterparts, and whether male and female students differed in this respect. Methods Between September 2013 and June 2014 an online questionnaire survey was administered to 15 UK, and 2 international medical schools. Participating schools provided both 5–6 year standard courses and 4 year accelerated graduate entry courses. The survey incorporated the Jefferson Scale of Empathy-Student Version (JSE-S) and Davis’s Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), both widely used to measure medical student empathy. Participation was voluntary. Chi squared tests were used to test for differences in biographical characteristics of student groups. Multiple linear regression analyses, in which predictor variables were year of course (first/final); sex; type of course and broad socio-economic group were used to compare empathy scores. Results Five medical schools (4 in the UK, 1 in New Zealand) achieved average response rates of 55 % (n = 652) among students starting their course and 48 % (n = 487) among final year students. These schools formed the High Response Rate Group. The remaining 12 medical schools recorded lower response rates of 24.0 % and 15.2 % among first and final year students respectively. These schools formed the Lower Response Rate Group. For both male and female students in both groups of schools no significant differences in any empathy scores were found between students starting and approaching the end of their course. Gender was found to significantly predict empathy scores, with females scoring higher than males. Conclusions Participant male and female medical students approaching the end of their undergraduate education, did not record lower levels of empathy, compared to those at the beginning of their course. Questions remain concerning the trajectory of empathy after qualification and how best to support it through the pressures of starting out in medical practice