2011 - UCSF School of Medicine - University of California, San ...
2011 - UCSF School of Medicine - University of California, San ...
2011 - UCSF School of Medicine - University of California, San ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>UCSF</strong> Education Day <strong>2011</strong>A Randomized Trial <strong>of</strong> ReflectiveLearning Guidelines and FeedbackAmong Third Year Medical StudentsLouise Aronson, MD, MFA,aronsonl@medicine.ucsf.edu; Brian Niehaus MD,Brian.Niehaus@ucsf.edu; Laura Hill-Sakurai, MD,HillSakL@fcm.ucsf.edu; Cindy Lai, MD,CLai@medicine.ucsf.edu; Patricia O'Sullivan, EdD,patricia.osullivan@ucsf.eduAreas abstract covers: UMEDomain(s) addressed: Competencies, Evaluation <strong>of</strong>Programs and Curricula, Feedback, ReflectionPurpose: To assess the impact <strong>of</strong> reflective learningguidelines and feedback, individually and together, onthe reflective ability demonstrated by medical students inwritten reflection exercises.Background: In response to national mandates,educators are increasingly incorporating reflection intotheir teaching. However, review <strong>of</strong> medical studentreflections from <strong>UCSF</strong> and elsewhere revealed that mostconsisted <strong>of</strong> anecdotes with few <strong>of</strong> the educationalcomponents described in the literature. We hypothesizethat learners do not reflect in an educationally useful waybecause we have not trained them to do so.Methods: We conducted a randomized, controlled trial<strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> reflective learning guidelines and facultyfeedback on reflective skills. All third year medicalstudents wrote reflections on pr<strong>of</strong>essionalism after their1st, 3rd and final clerkships. In a 2x2 design, half thestudents received reflective learning guidelines and halfdid not, and half in each <strong>of</strong> these groups receivedfeedback on both reflective skill and reflection contentand half received feedback on content alone. Reflectionswere scored by trained raters (r= 0.89) using apreviously validated 0 - 6 point rubric. We conducted ananalysis <strong>of</strong> covariance using 1st scores as the covariateand final scores as the dependent variable.Results: Mean reflection scores were 3.81 (sd=1.9)using guidelines and 2.22 (sd=.89) without guidelines(p