Biomedical subjects

Gina Dolan

Publications and source records attributed to Gina Dolan.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2004

Is our student portfolio valued?

A student portfolio was introduced for pre-registration nursing students at the University of Glamorgan in October 1997. The impetus for doing so was the recognised need to address:the 'theory-practice' divide;the need to provide nurse students with skills that will enable them to maintain the Professional Profile for registration purposes (). This article reports a research study evaluating the student portfolio. The main objectives of the evaluation were to investigate whether the portfolio addressed the perceived needs and to identify if students were experiencing potential benefits by using the portfolio. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with students and staff about their usage and perceptions of the portfolio. These findings were used to inform the design of the questionnaire to investigate students' experiences of using the portfolio, and their views about its usefulness. The questionnaires (n=219) confirmed the impression that students are not making frequent use of the portfolio. Students mainly discussed sections relating to academic aspects of the course. The summative assessment (essays) section was discussed by the greatest proportion of students (51% n=108). More students (74%) felt that too little time was spent on the portfolio than any other aspect of the course. Although many students and staff appreciate the potential value of using the portfolio, it is not a requirement of the course and so tends not to be treated as a high priority. Many of the recommendations from this study focussed on ways of integrating the portfolio into the course in order to increase its use. The results of this study have informed the development of an All Wales Student Portfolio introduced in April 2002 (Welsh Assembly Government, 2002).

Clinical Competence↗

PubMed2003

Assessing student nurse clinical competency: will we ever get it right?

In 1997, a revised system was introduced at the University of Glamorgan, Wales, to assess student nurse clinical competency. This was firstly as a result of concerns that the previous system was based on limited documentary evidence, and, secondly as the Welsh National Board for Nursing and Midwifery issued new competency statements. This article reports an evaluative research study which aimed to determine whether the revised system was an effective measure of clinical competency. A series of focus groups were conducted with students, tutors and clinical preceptors to discuss their experiences of using the revised system. A content analysis was conducted of all evidence written by students to support the achievement of clinical competency. The findings of the focus groups indicated that each group had some initial problems with the assessment process. The main concern for all groups was lack of consistency and uncertainty in the assessment process. Although the introduction of written evidence to support clinical competency was welcomed, many felt that too much evidence was required. Content analysis of competency documentation aimed to compare student evidence and to determine whether there were inconsistencies in the assessment process. There were many variations in the evidence obtained from students, in particular the amount of evidence written by each student. The findings clearly indicate that further revisions are necessary to ensure that the system is implemented in the most effective way. The Fitness for Practice report (UKCC, 1999) has ensured that competency-based assessment is here to stay in the UK. Evaluative research of this type is important to ensure that we adopt the most suitable approach to assessing clinical competency.

Clinical Competence↗

PubMed2003

Exploring doctor and patient views about risk communication and shared decision-making in the consultation.

BACKGROUND: There have been significant conceptual developments regarding shared decision-making (SDM) and assessments of people's hypothetical preferences for involvement in treatment or care decisions. There are few data on the perceptions of patients and professionals about SDM in actual practice. OBJECTIVE: To explore, from paired doctor-patient interviews, participants' perceptions of SDM in the consultation and the level of consensus between the participants in the consultation process. DESIGN: Qualitative analysis of semi-structured interview data. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Twenty general practitioners received training packages in 'risk communication' (RC) and 'SDM' to use as tools within the consultation. Forty patients with one of four conditions, for which a range of treatment options is available, were selected. Patient/doctor pairs were interviewed separately following consultations at four stages -'baseline' [general practitioner's (GP) usual consultation style], SDM training, RC alone, and both RC and SDM training. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using NVivo software. RESULTS: Risk communication interventions by doctors appeared to result in a greater perception of decisions being made in the consultation. High levels of satisfaction with consultations were evident before application of the interventions and did not change after the interventions. Doctors' and patients' perceptions of the consultations were highly congruent at all phases of the study. CONCLUSION: Shared decision-making and RC approaches were helpful in selected consultations and showed no detrimental effects to patients. However, the use of RC and SDM made only small differences to decision-making in consultations within the population studied. Increasing patient participation may be seen as more ethically justifiable than the traditional paternalistic approach but this needs to be set against the additional training costs incurred.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Public attitudes to human gene therapy: a pilot study in Wales.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore some factors influencing perceptions of human gene therapy. METHOD: A small qualitative study using two semi-structured interviews per participant (n = 22). The groups comprised (1) people with cystic fibrosis and members of their family (n = 9), and (2) students from a science evening class as well as lay members of the public selected from the practice list of a local general practitioner (n = 13). RESULTS: This pilot study demonstrates support for somatic gene therapy and ambivalence about germline gene therapy. A clear distinction is drawn between therapy and enhancement, with the majority opposing gene enhancement. CONCLUSIONS: Attitudes towards the acceptability of gene therapy are not necessarily determined by experience of, or exposure to, a genetic condition. More research is needed with the general public to determine what is perceived to be acceptable public policy in this field.

Adolescent↗