Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31438949›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2019

Is your mind set? - how are intra- and interpersonal competences dealt with in medical education? A multi-professional qualitative study.

Lisa Lombardo, Jan Ehlers, Gabriele Lutz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lisa LombardoInstitute for Didactics and Educational Research in Health Care, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58455, Witten, Germany. lisa.lombardo@uni-wh.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5268-8511
Jan EhlersChair for Didactics and Educational Research in Health Care, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58455, Witten, Germany.
Gabriele LutzIntegrated Curriculum for Anthroposophic Medicine (ICURAM), Chair for Medical Theory, Integrative and Anthroposophic Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Witten / Herdecke University, Gerhard Kienle Weg 4, 58313, Herdecke, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProfessional intrapersonal and interpersonal competences (IICs) form an important part of medical expertise but are given little attention during clinical training. In other professional fields such as psychotherapy, education and aviation, training in IICs is an integral part of education and practice. In medicine, IICs tend to actually decline during studies. To date it is unclear why IICs are given less attention in medicine, despite evidence for their importance in the treatment process. In view of this, the study examined the role of IICs in the treatment process, the current situation of IIC training in medicine and, most importantly, the reasons for the comparatively low focus on IICs in the clinical training of medical students.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were carried out with 21 experts from a variety of medical specialties and non-medical professions that provide a training with a stronger focus on IIC development. The interviews were evaluated using grounded theory.

resultsThe experts confirmed the idea that IICs are an equally important component in the treatment process, along with medical knowledge and technical skills. They also described large differences between the IICs possessed by physicians but noted a general developmental need. The key shortcoming was perceived to be a deep-seated defensiveness towards learning from mistakes and deficits e.g. through reflection and feedback. The interaction of different factors that seem to be reasons for this defensiveness and perpetuate it were identified: lack of support in dealing with insecurities in the face of responsibility; the notion of medicine as a science with the categories of right and wrong answers; and a range of pressures arising from the setting, such as hierarchical, economic and competition pressures.

conclusionOur study showed, that the defensive attitude towards learning from mistakes and deficits especially in the field of IICs appears to be a subtle but powerful obstacle for implementing IICs in medical training, in contrast to other professional fields. This obstacle is sustained by various underlying barrier factors. We therefore propose that changes should be made within a cultural transformation targeting this defensive mindset and culture and its presumed reasons.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalInterprofessional RelationsPhysiciansStudents, MedicalAttitude of Health PersonnelClinical CompetenceHumansProfessional CompetenceProfessional RoleQualitative ResearchIntra- and interpersonal competencesMedical educationMedical practice

Identifiers

PMID31438949
PMCPMC6704522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.