Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39387405›Full record

ArticleMedical education2025

(Mis)Alignment in resident and advisor co-regulated learning in competency-based training.

Leora Branfield Day, Deborah Butler, Ayelet Kuper, Rupal Shah, Lynfa Stroud, Shiphra Ginsburg, Walter Tavares, Ryan Brydges

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Leora Branfield DayDepartment of Medicine, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8533-0794
Deborah ButlerHuman Development, Learning, and Culture, Special Education, Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Ayelet KuperDepartment of Medicine, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Rupal ShahDepartment of Medicine, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Lynfa StroudDepartment of Medicine, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Shiphra GinsburgDepartment of Medicine, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4595-6650
Walter TavaresDepartment of Medicine, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8267-9448
Ryan BrydgesDepartment of Medicine, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5203-7049

Funding

Anonymous DonorsDepartment of Medicine, University of TorontoRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectiveIn implementing competence-based medical education (CBME), some Canadian residency programmes recruit clinicians to function as Academic Advisors (AAs). AAs are expected to help monitor residents' progress, coach them longitudinally, and serve as sources of co-regulated learning (Co-RL) to support their developing self-regulated learning (SRL) abilities. Implementing the AA role is optional, meaning each residency programme must decide whether and how to implement it, which could generate uncertainty and heterogeneity in how effectively AAs will "monitor and advise" residents. We sought to clarify how AA-resident dyads collaboratively interpret assessment data from multiple sources, co-create learning goals and action plans and attempt to enhance residents' SRL skills.

methodsShortly after each of their six meetings during two years of Internal Medicine residency, we conducted individual, brief interviews with AAs (N = 10) and residents (N = 10). We analysed transcripts using an abductive framework with theory-based and evidence-based sensitizing concepts.

resultsWe collected 49 residents and 36 AA 'meeting debriefs', which produced rich data on how dyads variably engaged in SRL and Co-RL. Residents and AAs adopted "learning stances" that oriented their perceptions and approaches to Co-RL. Their stances did not always align within dyads. We found unique patterns in how stances evolved or devolved over time, and in how these changes impacted dyads' Co-RL processes. While some dyads evolved to engage in proactive co-regulation, most stayed consistent or oscillated reactively in their relationships, with little apparent Co-RL focused on helping residents to develop clinical competencies through SRL. We catalogued multiple influential sources of regulation of learning.

conclusionThe conceptually ideal form of Co-RL was not consistently achieved in this well-intended implementation of AA-resident dyads. To better translate 'coaching over time' from intention to practice, we recommend that residency programmes use Co-RL principles to refine CBME processes, including refining assessment tools, resident orientation sessions and faculty development practices.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceCompetency-Based EducationInternal MedicineInternship and ResidencyLearningCanadaFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID39387405
PMCPMC11976187

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.