The development of core learning outcomes relevant to clinical practice: identifying priority areas for genetics education for non-genetics specialist registrars.

Centre for Research in Medical and Dental Education, University of Birmingham.
Clinical medicine (London, England) (Impact Factor: 1.69). 03/2009; 9(1):49-52. DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.9-1-49
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Advances in medical genetics are increasingly impacting on clinical practice outside specialist genetic services. It is widely acknowledged that physicians will need to use genetics knowledge and skills in order to incorporate these advances into patient care. In order to determine priority areas for genetics education for non-genetics specialist registrars, an educational needs assessment was undertaken. Consultants from cardiology, dermatology, neurology and genetics identified genetics knowledge, skills and attitudes required by non-genetics specialty trainees. From these, and informed by trainees' views of genetic education, six genetics learning outcomes that non-genetics medical specialty trainees should attain by the end of their training have been identified, each linked to core knowledge, skills and attitudes. These core concepts can be taught with reference to specialty-specific conditions to highlight their relevance to clinical practice. The results of this study are informing the genetic component of postgraduate medical training curricula.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Genetics education for physicians has been a popular publication topic in the United States and in Europe for over 20 years. Decreasing numbers of medical genetics professionals and an increasing volume of genetic information has created a dire need for increased genetics training in medical school and in clinical practice. This study aimed to assess how well pediatrics-focused primary care physicians apply their general genetics knowledge to clinical genetic testing using scenario-based questions. We chose to specifically focus on knowledge of the diagnostic applicability of Chromosomal Microarray (CMA) technology in pediatrics because of its recent recommendation by the International Standard Cytogenomic Array (ISCA) Consortium as a first-tier genetic test for individuals with developmental disabilities and/or congenital anomalies. Proficiency in ordering baseline genetic testing was evaluated for eighty-one respondents from four pediatrics-focused residencies (categorical pediatrics, pediatric neurology, internal medicine/pediatrics, and family practice) at two large residency programs in Houston, Texas. Similar to other studies, we found an overall deficit of genetic testing knowledge, especially among family practice residents. Interestingly, residents who elected to complete a genetics rotation in medical school scored significantly better than expected, as well as better than residents who did not elect to complete a genetics rotation. We suspect that the insufficient knowledge among physicians regarding a baseline genetics work-up is leading to redundant (i.e. concurrent karyotype and CMA) and incorrect (i.e. ordering CMA to detect achondroplasia) genetic testing and is contributing to rising health care costs in the United States. Our results provide specific teaching points upon which medical schools can focus education about clinical genetic testing and suggest that increased collaboration between primary care physicians and genetics professionals could benefit patient health care overall.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Learning outcomes are typically developed using standard group-based consensus methods. Two main constraints with standard techniques such as the Delphi method or expert working group processes are: (1) the ability to generate a comprehensive set of outcomes and (2) the capacity to reach agreement on them. We describe the first application of Group Concept Mapping (GCM) to the development of learning outcomes for an interdisciplinary module in medicine and engineering. The biomedical design module facilitates undergraduate participation in clinician-mentored team-based projects that prepare students for a multidisciplinary work environment. GCM attempts to mitigate the weaknesses of other consensus methods by excluding pre-determined classification schemes and inter-coder discussion, and by requiring just one round of data structuring. Academic members from medicine and engineering schools at three EU higher education institutions participated in this study. Data analysis, which included multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis, identified two main categories of outcomes: technical skills (new advancement in design process with special attention to users, commercialization and standardization) and transversal skills such as working effectively in teams and creative problem solving. The study emphasizes the need to address the highest order of learning taxonomy (analysis, synthesis, problem solving, creativity) when defining learning outcomes.
    12/2013; 3(3). DOI:10.1007/s40037-013-0095-7
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is broad agreement that healthcare professionals require fundamental training in genomics to keep pace with scientific advancement. Strong models that promote effective genomic education, however, are lacking. Furthermore, curricula at many institutions are now straining to adapt to the integration of additional material on next-generation sequencing and the bioethical and legal issues that will accompany clinical genomic testing. This article advocates for core competencies focused on job function, which will best prepare providers to be end-users of healthcare information. In addition, it argues in favor of online and blended learning models that incorporate student genotyping and specific training in the ethical, legal and social issues raised by genomic testing.
    Personalized Medicine 01/2014; 11(1):89. DOI:10.2217/pme.13.99 · 1.13 Impact Factor