Coaching in undergraduate medical education

A national survey

Datos Bibliográficos

ID15328895
AutoresMargaret Wolff (0000-0002-3637-2653, Emergency Medicine and Pediatrics, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, autor de correspondencia), Maya M Hammoud (0000-0001-7829-7930, University of Michigan), Maya Hammoud (Obstetrics and Gynecology and Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA), Sally A Santen (0000-0002-8327-8002, Emergency Medicine and Senior Associate Dean of Evaluation, Assessment and Scholarship, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA), Nicole M Deiorio (0000-0002-8123-1112, Virginia Commonwealth University), Nicole Deiorio (Emergency Medicine and Associate Dean of Student Affairs, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA), Megan Fix (0000-0003-4380-1273, Surgery, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA)
Año2019
Volumen25
Número1
Páginas1699765-1699765
Fecha de publicación2019-12-03
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaMedical Education Online (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1087-2981 • E-ISSN: 1087-2981
EditorialTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10872981.2019.1699765
PMID31793843
OpenAlexW2992879436
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas13
Referencias citadas7

Background : Evidence to support coaching in medical education has grown over the past decade leading educators to search for resources to aid the development of their own coaching programs. A sample of medical schools in the USA were surveyed to describe coaching programs to assist other institutions in the development and implementation of programs. Methods : Participants representing 32 medical schools attending a coaching conference in October 2018 were surveyed via email regarding their undergraduate medical education (UME) coaching programs. The 19-item instrument contained questions on program demographics, program characteristics, coach characteristics, coach training and coach assessment and program evaluation. Results : The response rate was 100% (32/32 programs). Nearly all respondents had a coaching program (53%, 17/32) or were developing one (44%, 14/32) with the majority being implemented in the past five years (82%, 14/17). Professional identity formation (80%, 20/25), professionalism (76%, 19/25), and academic performance (76%, 19/25) were the most commonly identified programmatic goals. The majority of coaches (64%, 16/25) received between 5-25% full time equivalent effort to support their role. Coaches did not formally assess students in any domain at most programs (84%, 21/25) or directly observe their students clinically (76%, 19/25). The majority of programs had formal coach training (88%, 22/25). Conclusion : These results demonstrate that coaching is being used to improve performance, professionalism, and professional identity formation in UME. This sample of coaching programs informs the discussion of coaching in medical education as educators strive to implement effective coaching programs

Coaching · Demographics · Medical education · Professional development · Sample (material · Sociology · Diversity and Career in Medicine · Health and Medical Research Impacts · Innovations in Medical Education · Medicine · Psychology