Faire une place pour l'enseignement du leadership dans la formation médicale prédoctorale au Canada

The need for effective leadership by physicians is clear, yet the design/delivery of curricula, and assessment of leadership competencies, in Undergraduate Medical Education (UGME) continues to need work. In reappraising their UGME assessment strategies, the Medical Council of Canada (MCC) invited position papers across diverse lenses, including the CanMEDS Intrinsic Roles. This article is foundational work derived from the report on leadership assessment to the MCC. Using Kern’s Model of Curriculum development as a guide, we reviewed the landscape of Canadian UGME leadership education through an environmental scan of the published and grey literature, Canadian leadership frameworks and resources, and consultation with learner and faculty leadership. Leadership education across programs was highly variable and learners were often unaware of available opportunities. In response, we have suggested processes for curricular development, including strategies for key content, teaching and assessment, and program evaluation considerations. Leadership education cannot remain another checkbox on a list of UGME experiences. Such training necessitates focused attention and investment to foster ongoing identity formation toward becoming a good doctor.Même si le besoin d’un leadership médical efficace est clair, la conception et l’implantation d’un cursus et de stratégies d’évaluations sur la compétence de leadership en éducation médicale prédoctorale demeure à optimiser. Dans le cadre de l’examen de ses stratégies d’évaluation de la formation médicale prédoctorale, le Conseil médical du Canada (CMC) a sollicité des énoncés de position portant sur divers aspects, y compris sur les rôles CanMEDS intrinsèques. Cet article s’appuie sur la soumission des auteurs concernant l’évaluation du leadership faite pour le CMC. Prenant le modèle de développement de cursus de Kern comme guide, nous avons examiné le paysage de l’enseignement du leadership dans la formation prédoctorale au Canada par le biais d’une analyse environnementale de la littérature scientifique et grise, des cadres et des ressources de leadership canadiens et d’une consultation avec des leaders parmi les étudiants et le corps professoral. L’enseignement du leadership dans les programmes est très variable et bien souvent, les apprenants ne sont pas au courant des possibilités offertes. En conséquence, nous suggérons des processus d’élaboration de cursus, y compris des stratégies d’enseignement en lien avec les sujets importants, l’enseignement, l’évaluation des apprenants et l’évaluation de programme. La formation au leadership ne peut pas demeurer un élément de la liste « à faire » pour l’éducation médicale prédoctorale. Une telle formation nécessite une attention et un investissement ciblés afin de favoriser la construction continue de l’identité de futurs bons médecins

Creating space for leadership education in undergraduate medical education in Canada

The need for effective leadership by physicians is clear, yet the design/delivery of curricula, and assessment of leadership competencies, in Undergraduate Medical Education (UGME) continues to need work. In reappraising their UGME assessment strategies, the Medical Council of Canada (MCC) invited position papers across diverse lenses, including the CanMEDS Intrinsic Roles. This article is foundational work derived from the report on leadership assessment to the MCC. Using Kern’s Model of Curriculum development as a guide, we reviewed the landscape of Canadian UGME leadership education through an environmental scan of the published and grey literature, Canadian leadership frameworks and resources, and consultation with learner and faculty leadership. Leadership education across programs was highly variable and learners were often unaware of available opportunities. In response, we have suggested processes for curricular development, including strategies for key content, teaching and assessment, and program evaluation considerations. Leadership education cannot remain another checkbox on a list of UGME experiences. Such training necessitates focused attention and investment to foster ongoing identity formation toward becoming a good doctor.Même si le besoin d’un leadership médical efficace est clair, la conception et l’implantation d’un cursus et de stratégies d’évaluations sur la compétence de leadership en éducation médicale prédoctorale demeure à optimiser. Dans le cadre de l’examen de ses stratégies d’évaluation de la formation médicale prédoctorale, le Conseil médical du Canada (CMC) a sollicité des énoncés de position portant sur divers aspects, y compris sur les rôles CanMEDS intrinsèques. Cet article s’appuie sur la soumission des auteurs concernant l’évaluation du leadership faite pour le CMC. Prenant le modèle de développement de cursus de Kern comme guide, nous avons examiné le paysage de l’enseignement du leadership dans la formation prédoctorale au Canada par le biais d’une analyse environnementale de la littérature scientifique et grise, des cadres et des ressources de leadership canadiens et d’une consultation avec des leaders parmi les étudiants et le corps professoral. L’enseignement du leadership dans les programmes est très variable et bien souvent, les apprenants ne sont pas au courant des possibilités offertes. En conséquence, nous suggérons des processus d’élaboration de cursus, y compris des stratégies d’enseignement en lien avec les sujets importants, l’enseignement, l’évaluation des apprenants et l’évaluation de programme. La formation au leadership ne peut pas demeurer un élément de la liste « à faire » pour l’éducation médicale prédoctorale. Une telle formation nécessite une attention et un investissement ciblés afin de favoriser la construction continue de l’identité de futurs bons médecins

Incidence and outcomes of critical illness in indigenous peoples: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background Indigenous Peoples experience health inequities and racism across the continuum of health services. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence and outcomes of critical illness among Indigenous Peoples. Methods We searched Ovid MEDLINE/PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to October 2022). Observational studies, case series of > 100 patients, clinical trial arms, and grey literature reports of Indigenous adults were eligible. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and appraised research quality from an Indigenous perspective using the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Assessment Tool. ICU mortality, ICU length of stay, and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) were compared using risk ratios and mean difference (MD) for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively. ICU admission was synthesized descriptively. Results Fifteen studies (Australia and/or New Zealand [n = 12] and Canada [n = 3]) were included. Risk of bias was low in 10 studies and moderate in 5, and included studies had minimal incorporation of Indigenous perspectives or consultation. There was no difference in ICU mortality between Indigenous and non-Indigenous (RR 1.14, 95%CI 0.98 to 1.34, I2 = 87%). We observed a shorter ICU length of stay among Indigenous (MD − 0.25; 95%CI, − 0.49 to − 0.00; I2 = 95%) and a higher use for IMV among non-Indigenous (RR 1.10; 95%CI, 1.06 to 1.15; I2 = 81%). Conclusion Research on Indigenous Peoples experience with critical care is poorly characterized and has rarely included Indigenous perspectives. ICU mortality between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations was similar, while there was a shorter ICU length of stay and less mechanical ventilation use among Indigenous patients. Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO CRD42021254661; Registered: 12 June, 2021