Karen Schultz

Background: Adaptive expertise is crucial in generalist areas of medicine, where practitioners must navigate both routine and novel clinical situations daily. While adaptive expertise has been well described in the literature, there is a gap when it comes to concrete guidance for teaching and assessing adaptive expertise. This study aims to develop an evidence-guided model to support clinical educators and learners with understanding adaptive expertise so that it can be taught and assessed in the context of clinical training. Methods: The research team used a three-stage process to develop a model of adaptive expertise. In Stage 1, a panel of experts created a concept map to describe elements of adaptive expertise in the context of the generalist clinical workplace, followed by a scoping review of the adaptive expertise literature in Stage 2. In Stage 3, the panel integrated the original concept map with the results of the scoping review to create a model of adaptive expertise in the context of the generalist clinical workplace using consensus development panel methodology. Results: The “See it, Address it, Solve it” model illustrates how generalist practitioners move through three iterative phases: identifying gaps in knowledge or care (“See it”), engaging in innovative and context-specific problem-solving (“Address it”), and implementing and refining solutions using clinical judgement (“Solve it”). Conclusions: The “See it, Address it, Solve it” model offers a practical resource to support both understanding of adaptive expertise in the clinical workplace, and help educators identify elements of adaptive expertise to facilitate teaching and assessment.

In the context of competency-based postgraduate education, professional progression is often tracked through milestones, particularly in North American set

As an early adopter of competency-based medical education (CBME) our postgraduate institution was uniquely positioned to analyze implementation experience data across programs, while keeping institutional factors constant. We described participants' experiences related to CBME implementation across programs derived from early program evaluation efforts within our setting. This evaluation focused on eight residency programs at a medium-sized academic institution in Canada. Participants (n = 175) included program leaders, faculty, and residents. The study consisted of 3 phases: (1) describing intended implementation; (2) documenting enacted implementation; and (3) comparing intended with enacted implementation to inform adaptations. Each program's findings were summarized in technical reports which were then analyzed thematically. Cross program data were organized by themes. Six themes were identified. All groups emphasized the need for ongoing refinement of CBME resulting from shared tensions such as increased assessment burden. However, there were some disparate CBME-related experiences between programs such as the experience with entrustable professional activities, the interpretation of retrospective entrustment anchors, and quality of feedback. We detected several cross-program successes and important challenges related to CBME. Our experience can inform other programs engaging in implementation and evaluation of CBME.

Our institution simultaneously transitioned all postgraduate specialty training programs to competency-based medical education (CBME) curricula. We explored experiences of CBME-trained residents graduating from five-year programs to inform the continued evolution of CBME in Canada. We utilized qualitative description to explore residents' experiences and inform continued CBME improvement. Data were collected from fifteen residents from various specialties through focus groups, interviews, and written responses. The data were analyzed inductively, using conventional content analysis. We identified five overarching themes. Three themes provided insight into residents' experiences with CBME, describing discrepancies between the intentions of CBME and how it was enacted, challenges with implementation, and variation in residents' experiences. Two themes - adaptations and recommendations - could inform meaningful refinements for CBME going forward. Residents graduating from CBME training programs offered a balanced perspective, including criticism and recognition of the potential value of CBME when implemented as intended. Their experiences provide a better understanding of residents' needs within CBME curricula, including greater balance and flexibility within programs of assessment and curricula. Many challenges that residents faced with CBME could be alleviated by greater accountability at program, institutional, and national levels. We conclude with actionable recommendations for addressing residents' needs in CBME.

Competency-based medical education (CBME) focuses on preparing physicians to improve the health of patients and populations. In the context of ongoing health disparities worldwide, medical educators must implement CBME in ways that advance social justice and anti-oppression. In this article, authors describe how CBME can be implemented to promote equity pedagogy, an approach to education in which curricular design, teaching, assessment strategies, and learning environments support learners from diverse groups to be successful. The five core components of CBME programs - outcomes competency framework, progressive sequencing of competencies, learning experiences tailored to learners' needs, teaching focused on competencies, and programmatic assessment - enable individualization of learning experiences and teaching and encourage learners to partner with their teachers in driving their learning. These educational approaches appreciate each learner's background, experiences, and strengths. Using an exemplar case study, the authors illustrate how CBME can afford opportunities to enhance anti-oppression and social justice in medical education and promote each learner's success in meeting the expected outcomes of training. The authors provide recommendations for individuals and institutions implementing CBME to enact equity pedagogy.

Faculty development in medical education is often delivered in an ad hoc manner instead of being a deliberately sequenced program matched to data-informed individual needs. In this article, the authors, all with extensive experience in Faculty Development (FD), present a competency-based faculty development (CBFD) framework envisioned to enhance the impact of FD. Steps and principles in the CBFD framework reflect the lessons learned from competency-based medical education (CBME) with its foundational goal to better train physicians to meet societal needs. The authors see CBFD as a similar framework, this one to better train faculty to meet educational needs. CBFD core elements include: articulated competencies for the varied educational roles faculty fulfill, deliberately designed curricula structured to build those competencies, and an assessment program and process to support individualized faculty learning and professional growth. The framework incorporates ideas about where and how CBFD should be delivered, the use of coaching to promote reflection and identity formation and the creation of communities of learning. As with CBME, the CBFD framework has included the important considerations of change management, including broad stakeholder engagement, continuous quality improvement and scholarship. The authors have provided examples from the literature as well as challenges and considerations for each step.

Background: While research suggests that manifestations of the hidden curriculum (HC) phenomenon have the potential to reinforce or undermine the values of an institution, very few studies have comprehensively measured its scope, impact, and the varied clinical teaching and learning contexts within which they occur. We explored the HC and examined the validity of newly developed constructs and determined the influence of context on the HC. Methods: We surveyed medical students (n =182), residents (n =148), and faculty (n = 140) from all disciplines at our institution between 2019 and 2020. Based on prior research and expertise, we measured participants’ experience with the HC including perceptions of respect and disrespect for different medical disciplines, settings in which the HC is experienced, impact of the HC, personal actions, efficacy, and their institutional perceptions. We examined the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the HC constructs using exploratory factor analysis Cronbach’s alpha, regression analysis and Pearson’s correlations. Results: Expert judges (physician faculty and medical learners) confirmed the content validity of the items used and the analysis revealed new HC constructs reflecting negative expressions, positive impacts and expressions, negative impacts, personal actions, and positive institutional perceptions of the HC. Evidence for criterion validity was found for the negative impacts and the personal actions constructs and were significantly associated with the stage of respondents’ career and gender. Support for convergent validity was obtained for HC constructs that were significantly correlated with certain contexts within which the HC occurs. Conclusion: More unique dimensions and contexts of the HC exist than have been previously documented. The findings demonstrate that specific clinical contexts can be targeted to improve negative expressions and impacts of the HC.

Residents and faculty have described a burden of assessment related to the implementation of competency-based medical education (CBME), which may undermine its benefits. Although this concerning signal has been identified, little has been done to identify adaptations to address this problem. Grounded in an analysis of an early Canadian pan-institutional CBME adopter’s experience, this article describes postgraduate programs’ adaptations related to the challenges of assessment in CBME. From June 2019–September 2022, 8 residency programs underwent a standardized Rapid Evaluation guided by the Core Components Framework (CCF). Sixty interviews and 18 focus groups were held with invested partners. Transcripts were analyzed abductively using CCF, and ideal implementation was compared with enacted implementation. These findings were then shared back with program leaders, adaptations were subsequently developed, and technical reports were generated for each program. Researchers reviewed the technical reports to identify themes related to the burden of assessment with a subsequent focus on identifying adaptations across programs. Three themes were identified: (1) disparate mental models of assessment processes in CBME, (2) challenges in workplace-based assessment processes, and (3) challenges in performance review and decision making. Theme 1 included entrustment interpretation and lack of shared mindset for performance standards. Adaptations included revising entrustment scales, faculty development, and formalizing resident membership. Theme 2 involved direct observation, timeliness of assessment completion, and feedback quality. Adaptations included alternative assessment strategies beyond entrustable professional activity forms and proactive assessment planning. Theme 3 related to resident data monitoring and competence committee decision making. Adaptations included adding resident representatives to the competence committee and assessment platform enhancements. These adaptations represent responses to the concerning signal of significant burden of assessment within CBME being experienced broadly. The authors hope other programs may learn from their institution’s experience and navigate the CBME-related assessment burden their invested partners may be facing.

The growing international adoption of competency-based medical education has created a desire for descriptions of innovative assessment approaches that generate appropriate and sufficient information to allow for informed, defensible decisions about learner progress. In this article, the authors provide an overview of the development and implementation of the approach to programmatic assessment in postgraduate family medicine training programs in Canada, called Continuous Reflective Assessment for Training (CRAFT). CRAFT is a principles-guided, high-level approach to workplace-based assessment that was intentionally designed to be adaptable to local contexts, including size of program, resources available, and structural enablers and barriers. CRAFT has been implemented in all 17 Canadian family medicine residency programs, with each program taking advantage of the high-level nature of the CRAFT guidelines to create bespoke assessment processes and tools appropriate for their local contexts. Similarities and differences in CRAFT implementation between 5 different family medicine residency training programs, representing both English- and French-language programs from both Western and Eastern Canada, are described. Despite the intentional flexibility of the CRAFT guidelines, notable similarities in assessment processes and procedures across the 5 programs were seen. A meta-evaluation of findings from programs that have published evaluation information supports the value of CRAFT as an effective approach to programmatic assessment. While CRAFT is currently in place in family medicine residency programs in Canada, given its adaptability to different contexts as well as promising evaluation data, the CRAFT approach shows promise for application in other training environments.

Context: Medical assistance in dying (MAID) became legal across Canada when Bill C-14 was passed in 2016. Currently, little is known about the most effective strategies for providing MAID education, and the importance of integrating MAID into existing curricula. Objective: To develop a set of learning objectives (LOs) to inform a foundational medical assistance in dying (MAID) curriculum in Canadian Family Medicine (FM) residency training programs. Study Design: Mixed-methods were used to develop LOs based on a previously-published needs assessment. Draft LOs were evaluated and modified using a modified Delphi process and focus group, and then mapped to the existing FM residency curriculum, as well as the CFPC Priority Topics and CanMEDS-Family Medicine roles. Setting: A large, four-site family medicine residency program in southeastern Ontario. Population Studied: Delphi participants included key FM faculty and resident leaders, while the focus group included the faculty knowledgeable about MAID and the assessment system. Outcome Measures: A set of LOs, proportion of LOs that map to existing FM residency curriculum, CFPC Priority Topics and CanMEDS-Family Medicine roles. Findings: Nine LOs were developed to provide a foundational education regarding MAID. While all LOs could be mapped to the Domains of Clinical Care with the departmental curriculum, they mapped inconsistently to departmental Entrustable Professional Activities, the Priority Topics, and CanMEDS-FM roles. LOs focused on patient education and identification of patient goals were most readily mapped to existing curricular framework, while LOs with MAID-exclusive content revealed gaps in the current curriculum. Conclusion: The developed LOs provide a guide to ensure family medicine residents obtain generalist-level knowledge to counsel their patients about MAID. These LOs can be used not only to develop FM MAID curriculum and assess competency, but also serve as a model for developing LOs and curriculum in other Canadian specialty residency programs.