PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

L Slatt

Publications and source records attributed to L Slatt.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Community preceptors' views of a required third-year family medicine clerkship.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies documented the importance of family medicine clerkships to medical student education and to the potential costs of precepting students borne by community physicians. But what are the physicians' views of their experience, their perceived needs for teaching, and sources of satisfaction from the preceptor role? OBJECTIVES: To explore preceptors' views of a required, third-year family medicine clerkship, focusing on satisfaction with the teaching experience, effect of having students in the practice, and concerns about continuing as a preceptor. METHODS: Preceptors from 38 private practices were asked to participate in a 15-minute telephone survey, using a semistructured interview format. RESULTS: Thirty-five physicians (92%) agreed to participate and 33 of the 35 primary preceptors were interviewed. Of those interviewed, 29 (88%) indicated a positive teaching experience, and 31 (94%) desired to continue precepting. Intangible rewards (eg, love of teaching or "giving back" to the specialty of family medicine) far out-weighed tangible rewards (eg, dinners or letters of appreciation) with regard to their desire to precept. Continued satisfaction with precepting seemed to be affected by loss of revenue to the practice, longer work hours, ability to effectively manage time and patient load, and need for additional educational resources and equipment. CONCLUSIONS: Intrinsic rewards seem to be a key factor in the physicians' decision to precept. Moreover, to reinforce the preceptor's continued desire to precept, faculty development, provision of educational tools and resources, and remuneration may be necessary. Preceptors should be asked routinely about their needs, and special programs of support should be offered.

Clinical Clerkship↗

Validating audiovisual reviews as a strategy for teaching behavioral medicine to primary care residents.

A study examining the usefulness of audiovisual reviews (AVR's) as a method of teaching behavioral medicine was done with family medicine residents and faculty at the UNC School of Medicine. A set of educational goals for family medicine residency training was established. In a survey faculty and residents were asked to rate the importance of teaching each goal during residency and the appropriateness of AVR's for teaching it. Observers recorded the content of discussion in 18 regularly scheduled AVR's. In survey results both faculty and residents agreed that AVR's are best suited for teaching behavioral medicine skills. However, there were different goals, depending on level of training. Content analysis of the observed AVR's showed that the four most valued teaching goals comprised 50% of the topics discussed in actual AVR's. Results of this study validate the use of AVR's as a teaching strategy for behavioral medicine skills.

Audiovisual Aids↗

Focus groups: a useful tool for curriculum evaluation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Focus group interviews have been used extensively in health services program planning, health education, and curriculum planning. However, with the exception of a few reports describing the use of focus groups for a basic science course evaluation and a clerkship's impact on medical students, the potential of focus groups as a tool for curriculum evaluation has not been explored. Focus groups are a valid stand-alone evaluation process, but they are most often used in combination with other quantitative and qualitative methods. Focus groups rely heavily on group interaction, combining elements of individual interviews and participant observation. This article compares the focus group interview with both quantitative and qualitative methods; discusses when to use focus group interviews; outlines a protocol for conducting focus groups, including a comparison of various styles of qualitative data analysis; and offers a case study, in which focus groups evaluated the effectiveness of a pilot preclinical curriculum.

Curriculum↗