Setting priorities for health education research : a mixed methods study
- Palermo, Claire, King, Olivia, Brock, Tina, Brown, Ted, Crampton, Paul, Hall, Helen, Macaulay, Janet, Morphet, Julia, Mundy, Matthew, Oliaro, Louise, Paynter, Sophie, Williams, Brett, Wright, Caroline, Rees, Charlotte
- Authors: Palermo, Claire , King, Olivia , Brock, Tina , Brown, Ted , Crampton, Paul , Hall, Helen , Macaulay, Janet , Morphet, Julia , Mundy, Matthew , Oliaro, Louise , Paynter, Sophie , Williams, Brett , Wright, Caroline , Rees, Charlotte
- Date: 2019
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Medical Teacher Vol. 41, no. 9 (2019), p. 1029-1038
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Introduction: Identifying priority research topics that meet the needs of multiple stakeholders should maximize research investment. Aim: To identify priorities for health education research. Methods: A three-stage sequential mixed methods study was conducted. Priorities for health education research were identified through a qualitative survey with 104 students, patients, academics, and clinicians across five health sciences and 12 professions (stage 1). These findings were analyzed using framework analysis and transposed into a quantitative survey whereby 780 stakeholders rated and ranked the identified priorities. Descriptive statistics identified priorities, exploratory factor analysis grouped priorities and differences between stakeholders were determined using Mann–Whitney U tests (stage 2). Six individual or group interviews with 16 participants (stage 3) further explicated the results from previous stages. Results: Of 30 priorities identified, the top were: how best to ensure students develop the required skills for work; how to promote resiliency and well-being in students; and ensuring the curriculum prepares students for work. For the majority of priorities, no significant differences were found between different stakeholder groups. Conclusions: These findings will be used to inform health educational research strategy both locally and nationally. Further research should explore if setting priorities can be translated effectively into education research policy and practice. © 2019, © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
- Authors: Palermo, Claire , King, Olivia , Brock, Tina , Brown, Ted , Crampton, Paul , Hall, Helen , Macaulay, Janet , Morphet, Julia , Mundy, Matthew , Oliaro, Louise , Paynter, Sophie , Williams, Brett , Wright, Caroline , Rees, Charlotte
- Date: 2019
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Medical Teacher Vol. 41, no. 9 (2019), p. 1029-1038
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Introduction: Identifying priority research topics that meet the needs of multiple stakeholders should maximize research investment. Aim: To identify priorities for health education research. Methods: A three-stage sequential mixed methods study was conducted. Priorities for health education research were identified through a qualitative survey with 104 students, patients, academics, and clinicians across five health sciences and 12 professions (stage 1). These findings were analyzed using framework analysis and transposed into a quantitative survey whereby 780 stakeholders rated and ranked the identified priorities. Descriptive statistics identified priorities, exploratory factor analysis grouped priorities and differences between stakeholders were determined using Mann–Whitney U tests (stage 2). Six individual or group interviews with 16 participants (stage 3) further explicated the results from previous stages. Results: Of 30 priorities identified, the top were: how best to ensure students develop the required skills for work; how to promote resiliency and well-being in students; and ensuring the curriculum prepares students for work. For the majority of priorities, no significant differences were found between different stakeholder groups. Conclusions: These findings will be used to inform health educational research strategy both locally and nationally. Further research should explore if setting priorities can be translated effectively into education research policy and practice. © 2019, © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Understanding students' and clinicians' experiences of informal interprofessional workplace learning: An Australian qualitative study
- Rees, Charlotte, Crampton, Paul, Kent, Fiona, Brown, Ted, Hood, Kerry
- Authors: Rees, Charlotte , Crampton, Paul , Kent, Fiona , Brown, Ted , Hood, Kerry
- Date: 2018
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: BMJ Open Vol. 8, no. 4 (2018), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objectives While postgraduate studies have begun to shed light on informal interprofessional workplace learning, studies with preregistration learners have typically focused on formal and structured work-based learning. The current study investigated preregistration students' informal interprofessional workplace learning by exploring students' and clinicians' experiences of interprofessional student-clinician (IPSC) interactions. Design A qualitative interview study using narrative techniques was conducted. Setting Student placements across multiple clinical sites in Victoria, Australia. Participants Through maximum variation sampling, 61 participants (38 students and 23 clinicians) were recruited from six professions (medicine, midwifery, nursing, occupational therapy, paramedicine and physiotherapy). Methods We conducted 12 group and 10 individual semistructured interviews. Themes were identified through framework analysis, and the similarities and differences in subthemes by participant group were interrogated. Results Six themes relating to four research questions were identified: (1) conceptualisations of IPSC interactions; (2) context for interaction experiences; (3) the nature of interaction experiences; (4) factors contributing to positive or negative interactions; (5) positive or negative consequences of interactions and (6) suggested improvements for IPSC interactions. Seven noteworthy differences in subthemes between students and clinicians and across the professions were identified. Conclusions Despite the results largely supporting previous postgraduate research, the findings illustrate greater breadth and depth of understandings, experiences and suggestions for preregistration education. Educators and students are encouraged to seek opportunities for informal interprofessional learning afforded by the workplace. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. **Please note that there are multiple authors for this article therefore only the name of the first 5 including Federation University Australia affiliate “Kerry Hood” is provided in this record**
- Authors: Rees, Charlotte , Crampton, Paul , Kent, Fiona , Brown, Ted , Hood, Kerry
- Date: 2018
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: BMJ Open Vol. 8, no. 4 (2018), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objectives While postgraduate studies have begun to shed light on informal interprofessional workplace learning, studies with preregistration learners have typically focused on formal and structured work-based learning. The current study investigated preregistration students' informal interprofessional workplace learning by exploring students' and clinicians' experiences of interprofessional student-clinician (IPSC) interactions. Design A qualitative interview study using narrative techniques was conducted. Setting Student placements across multiple clinical sites in Victoria, Australia. Participants Through maximum variation sampling, 61 participants (38 students and 23 clinicians) were recruited from six professions (medicine, midwifery, nursing, occupational therapy, paramedicine and physiotherapy). Methods We conducted 12 group and 10 individual semistructured interviews. Themes were identified through framework analysis, and the similarities and differences in subthemes by participant group were interrogated. Results Six themes relating to four research questions were identified: (1) conceptualisations of IPSC interactions; (2) context for interaction experiences; (3) the nature of interaction experiences; (4) factors contributing to positive or negative interactions; (5) positive or negative consequences of interactions and (6) suggested improvements for IPSC interactions. Seven noteworthy differences in subthemes between students and clinicians and across the professions were identified. Conclusions Despite the results largely supporting previous postgraduate research, the findings illustrate greater breadth and depth of understandings, experiences and suggestions for preregistration education. Educators and students are encouraged to seek opportunities for informal interprofessional learning afforded by the workplace. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. **Please note that there are multiple authors for this article therefore only the name of the first 5 including Federation University Australia affiliate “Kerry Hood” is provided in this record**
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »