Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34753482›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2021

Health Humanities curriculum and evaluation in health professions education: a scoping review.

Sandra E Carr, Farah Noya, Brid Phillips, Anna Harris, Karen Scott, Claire Hooker, Nahal Mavaddat, Mary Ani-Amponsah, Daniel M Vuillermin, Steve Reid and 1 more

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

11 authors.

Sandra E CarrHealth Professions Education, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. Sandra.Carr@uwa.edu.au.
Farah NoyaHealth Professions Education, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Brid PhillipsHealth Professions Education, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Anna HarrisFaculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Karen ScottMedical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Claire HookerMedical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Nahal MavaddatMedical School, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Mary Ani-AmponsahCollege of Health Sciences, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana.
Daniel M VuillerminInstitute for Medical Humanities, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Steve ReidUniversity of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Pamela Brett-MacLeanFaculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe articulation of learning goals, processes and outcomes related to health humanities teaching currently lacks comparability of curricula and outcomes, and requires synthesis to provide a basis for developing a curriculum and evaluation framework for health humanities teaching and learning. This scoping review sought to answer how and why the health humanities are used in health professions education. It also sought to explore how health humanities curricula are evaluated and whether the programme evaluation aligns with the desired learning outcomes.

methodsA focused scoping review of qualitative and mixed-methods studies that included the influence of integrated health humanities curricula in pre-registration health professions education with programme evaluate of outcomes was completed. Studies of students not enrolled in a pre-registration course, with only ad-hoc health humanities learning experiences that were not assessed or evaluated were excluded. Four databases were searched (CINAHL), (ERIC), PubMed, and Medline.

resultsThe search over a 5 year period, identified 8621 publications. Title and abstract screening, followed by full-text screening, resulted in 24 articles selected for inclusion. Learning outcomes, learning activities and evaluation data were extracted from each included publication. DISCUSSION: Reported health humanities curricula focused on developing students' capacity for perspective, reflexivity, self- reflection and person-centred approaches to communication. However, the learning outcomes were not consistently described, identifying a limited capacity to compare health humanities curricula across programmes. A set of clearly stated generic capabilities or outcomes from learning in health humanities would be a helpful next step for benchmarking, clarification and comparison of evaluation strategy.

Indexed as

CurriculumHumanitiesHealth OccupationsHumansLearningStudentsCurriculum evaluationHealth HumanitiesHealth professions educationMedical HumanitiesScoping review

Identifiers

PMID34753482
PMCPMC8579562

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.