Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33141344›Full record

ArticleAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2020

"You can't always get what you want…": economic thinking, constrained optimization and health professions education.

J A Cleland, J Foo, D Ilic, S Maloney, Y You

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

J A ClelandLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, 308232, Singapore. Jennifer.cleland@ntu.edu.sg.ORCID 0000-0003-1433-9323
J FooSchool of Primary and Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
D IlicMedical Education Research and Quality (MERQ) Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
S MaloneySchool of Primary and Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Y YouHealth Science Centre, Peking University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Every choice we make in health professions education has a cost, whether it be financial or otherwise; by choosing one action (e.g., integrating more simulation, studying more for a summative examination) we lose the opportunity to take an alternative action (e.g., freeing up time for other teaching, leisure time). Economics significantly shapes the way we behave and think as educators and learners and so there is increasing interest in using economic ways of thinking and approaches to examine and understand how choices are made, the influence of constraints and boundaries in educational decision making, and how costs are felt. Thus, in this article, we provide a brief historical overview of modern economics, to illustrate how the core concepts of economics-scarcity (and desirability), rationality, and optimization-developed over time. We explain the important concept of bounded rationality, which explains how individual, meso-factors and contextual factors influence decision making. We then consider the opportunities that these concepts afford for health professions education and research. We conclude by proposing that embracing economic thinking opens up new questions and new ways of approaching old questions which can add knowledge about how choice is enacted in contemporary health professions education.

Indexed as

Decision MakingEconomicsCognitionCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth PersonnelHumansKnowledgeResearchEconomicsHealth professions educationOptimizationRationalityScarcity

Identifiers

PMID33141344
PMCPMC7606851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.