Attributes affecting the medical school primary care experience

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Favorable primary care (PC) experiences might encourage more medical students to pursue generalist careers, yet academicians know little about which attributes influence the medical school PC experience. The authors sought to identify such attributes and weight their importance. Method: Semistructured interviews with 16 academic generalist leaders of family medicine, general internal medicine, and general pediatrics led to the development of a Web-based survey, administered to a national sample of 126 generalist faculty. Survey respondents rated (on a nine-point Likert-like scale) the importance of each interview-generated PC medical school attribute and indicated (yes/no) whether outside experts' assessment of the attributes would be valid. The authors assessed interrater agreement. Results: Interview thematic analysis generated 58 institutional attributes in four categories: informal curriculum (23), institutional infrastructure (6), educational/curricular infrastructure (6), and specific educational experiences (23). Of these 58, 31 (53%) had median importance ratings of >7 (highly important). For 14 of these (45%), more than two-thirds of respondents indicated external expert surveys would provide a valid assessment. Of the 23 informal curriculum attributes, 20 (87%) received highly important ratings; however, more than two-thirds of respondents believed that external expert survey ratings would be valid for only 4 (20%) of them. Strong agreement occurred among respondents across the generalist fields. Conclusions: Academic generalist educators identified several attributes as highly important in shaping the quality of the medical school PC experience. Informal curriculum attributes appeared particularly influential, but these attributes may not be validly assessed via expert surveys, suggesting the need for other measures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)605-613
Number of pages9
JournalAcademic Medicine
Volume85
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2010

Fingerprint

expert survey
Medical Schools
primary school
Primary Health Care
rating
curriculum
experience
interview
infrastructure
general medicine
Curriculum
Interviews
medical student
career
medicine
expert
educator
leader
Surveys and Questionnaires
school

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Education

Cite this

Attributes affecting the medical school primary care experience. / Jerant, Anthony F; Srinivasan, Malathi; Bertakis, Klea D; Azari, Rahman; Pan, Richard J.; Kravitz, Richard L.

In: Academic Medicine, Vol. 85, No. 4, 04.2010, p. 605-613.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{84d8860fc5b043168d39c2b340aa9176,
title = "Attributes affecting the medical school primary care experience",
abstract = "Purpose: Favorable primary care (PC) experiences might encourage more medical students to pursue generalist careers, yet academicians know little about which attributes influence the medical school PC experience. The authors sought to identify such attributes and weight their importance. Method: Semistructured interviews with 16 academic generalist leaders of family medicine, general internal medicine, and general pediatrics led to the development of a Web-based survey, administered to a national sample of 126 generalist faculty. Survey respondents rated (on a nine-point Likert-like scale) the importance of each interview-generated PC medical school attribute and indicated (yes/no) whether outside experts' assessment of the attributes would be valid. The authors assessed interrater agreement. Results: Interview thematic analysis generated 58 institutional attributes in four categories: informal curriculum (23), institutional infrastructure (6), educational/curricular infrastructure (6), and specific educational experiences (23). Of these 58, 31 (53{\%}) had median importance ratings of >7 (highly important). For 14 of these (45{\%}), more than two-thirds of respondents indicated external expert surveys would provide a valid assessment. Of the 23 informal curriculum attributes, 20 (87{\%}) received highly important ratings; however, more than two-thirds of respondents believed that external expert survey ratings would be valid for only 4 (20{\%}) of them. Strong agreement occurred among respondents across the generalist fields. Conclusions: Academic generalist educators identified several attributes as highly important in shaping the quality of the medical school PC experience. Informal curriculum attributes appeared particularly influential, but these attributes may not be validly assessed via expert surveys, suggesting the need for other measures.",
author = "Jerant, {Anthony F} and Malathi Srinivasan and Bertakis, {Klea D} and Rahman Azari and Pan, {Richard J.} and Kravitz, {Richard L}",
year = "2010",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181d29af7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "85",
pages = "605--613",
journal = "Academic Medicine",
issn = "1040-2446",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Attributes affecting the medical school primary care experience

AU - Jerant, Anthony F

AU - Srinivasan, Malathi

AU - Bertakis, Klea D

AU - Azari, Rahman

AU - Pan, Richard J.

AU - Kravitz, Richard L

PY - 2010/4

Y1 - 2010/4

N2 - Purpose: Favorable primary care (PC) experiences might encourage more medical students to pursue generalist careers, yet academicians know little about which attributes influence the medical school PC experience. The authors sought to identify such attributes and weight their importance. Method: Semistructured interviews with 16 academic generalist leaders of family medicine, general internal medicine, and general pediatrics led to the development of a Web-based survey, administered to a national sample of 126 generalist faculty. Survey respondents rated (on a nine-point Likert-like scale) the importance of each interview-generated PC medical school attribute and indicated (yes/no) whether outside experts' assessment of the attributes would be valid. The authors assessed interrater agreement. Results: Interview thematic analysis generated 58 institutional attributes in four categories: informal curriculum (23), institutional infrastructure (6), educational/curricular infrastructure (6), and specific educational experiences (23). Of these 58, 31 (53%) had median importance ratings of >7 (highly important). For 14 of these (45%), more than two-thirds of respondents indicated external expert surveys would provide a valid assessment. Of the 23 informal curriculum attributes, 20 (87%) received highly important ratings; however, more than two-thirds of respondents believed that external expert survey ratings would be valid for only 4 (20%) of them. Strong agreement occurred among respondents across the generalist fields. Conclusions: Academic generalist educators identified several attributes as highly important in shaping the quality of the medical school PC experience. Informal curriculum attributes appeared particularly influential, but these attributes may not be validly assessed via expert surveys, suggesting the need for other measures.

AB - Purpose: Favorable primary care (PC) experiences might encourage more medical students to pursue generalist careers, yet academicians know little about which attributes influence the medical school PC experience. The authors sought to identify such attributes and weight their importance. Method: Semistructured interviews with 16 academic generalist leaders of family medicine, general internal medicine, and general pediatrics led to the development of a Web-based survey, administered to a national sample of 126 generalist faculty. Survey respondents rated (on a nine-point Likert-like scale) the importance of each interview-generated PC medical school attribute and indicated (yes/no) whether outside experts' assessment of the attributes would be valid. The authors assessed interrater agreement. Results: Interview thematic analysis generated 58 institutional attributes in four categories: informal curriculum (23), institutional infrastructure (6), educational/curricular infrastructure (6), and specific educational experiences (23). Of these 58, 31 (53%) had median importance ratings of >7 (highly important). For 14 of these (45%), more than two-thirds of respondents indicated external expert surveys would provide a valid assessment. Of the 23 informal curriculum attributes, 20 (87%) received highly important ratings; however, more than two-thirds of respondents believed that external expert survey ratings would be valid for only 4 (20%) of them. Strong agreement occurred among respondents across the generalist fields. Conclusions: Academic generalist educators identified several attributes as highly important in shaping the quality of the medical school PC experience. Informal curriculum attributes appeared particularly influential, but these attributes may not be validly assessed via expert surveys, suggesting the need for other measures.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77951694573&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77951694573&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181d29af7

DO - 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181d29af7

M3 - Article

C2 - 20354375

AN - SCOPUS:77951694573

VL - 85

SP - 605

EP - 613

JO - Academic Medicine

JF - Academic Medicine

SN - 1040-2446

IS - 4

ER -