Physician remediation: accepting and working with complementary conceptualisations

Emotion in remediation: A scoping review of the medical education literature

OBJECTIVES

Remediation can be crucial and high stakes for medical learners, and experts agree it is often not optimally conducted. Research from other fields indicates that explicit incorporation of emotion improves education because of emotion's documented impacts on learning. Because this could present an important opportunity for improving remediation, we aimed to investigate how the literature on remediation interventions in medical education discusses emotion.

METHODS

The authors used Arksey and O'Malley's framework to conduct a scoping literature review of records describing remediation interventions in medical education, using PubMed, CINAHL Complete, ERIC, Web of Science and APA PsycInfo databases, including all English-language publications through 1 May 2020 meeting search criteria. They included publications discussing remediation interventions either empirically or theoretically, pertaining to physicians or physician trainees of any level. Two independent reviewers used a standardised data extraction form to report descriptive information; they reviewed included records for the presence of mentions of emotion, described the mentions and analysed results thematically.

RESULTS

Of 1644 records, 199 met inclusion criteria and were reviewed in full. Of those, 112 (56%) mentioned emotion in some way; others focused solely on cognitive aspects of remediation. The mentions of emotion fell into three themes based on when the emotion was cited as present: during regular coursework or practice, upon referral for remediation and during remediation. One-quarter of records (50) indicated potential intentional incorporation of emotion into remediation programme design, but they were non-specific as to how emotions related to the learning process itself.

CONCLUSION

Even though emotion is omnipresent in remediation, medical educators frequently do not factor emotion into the design of remediation approaches and rarely explicitly utilise emotion to improve the learning process. Applications from other fields may help medical educators leverage emotion to improve learning in remediation, including strategies to frame and design remediation.

Guidelines: The dos, don'ts and don't knows of remediation in medical education

INTRODUCTION

Two developing forces have achieved prominence in medical education: the advent of competency-based assessments and a growing commitment to expand access to medicine for a broader range of learners with a wider array of preparation. Remediation is intended to support all learners to achieve sufficient competence. Therefore, it is timely to provide practical guidelines for remediation in medical education that clarify best practices, practices to avoid, and areas requiring further research, in order to guide work with both individual struggling learners and development of training program policies.

METHODS

Collectively, we generated an initial list of Do's, Don'ts, and Don't Knows for remediation in medical education, which was then iteratively refined through discussions and additional evidence-gathering. The final guidelines were then graded for the strength of the evidence by consensus.

RESULTS

We present 26 guidelines: two groupings of Do's (systems-level interventions and recommendations for individual learners), along with short lists of Don'ts and Don't Knows, and our interpretation of the strength of current evidence for each guideline.

CONCLUSIONS

Remediation is a high-stakes, highly complex process involving learners, faculty, systems, and societal factors. Our synthesis resulted in a list of guidelines that summarize the current state of educational theory and empirical evidence that can improve remediation processes at individual and institutional levels. Important unanswered questions remain; ongoing research can further improve remediation practices to ensure the appropriate support for learners, institutions, and society.