Commentary: Paradigms, Axiology, and Praxeology in Medical Education Research

Anatomy outreach: A conceptual model of shared purposes and processes

Anatomy outreach is a well-documented practice by many academic institutions, defined here as when anatomy-related services are provided to external communities. However, most of the current literature on this topic is largely descriptive, focusing on the 'what' of anatomy-related outreach, rather than the generalizable 'why' or 'how'. There exists no shared conceptual model of what anatomy outreach tries to achieve from the perspective of 'outreachers', and how anatomists support these goals. Thus, this study aimed to explore the comprehension of anatomy outreach as a social phenomenon in the anatomy education community. This qualitative research used constructivist grounded theory to explore the perspectives of anatomists with experience facilitating anatomy outreach. A total of 18 participants completed semi-structured interviews. Analysis resulted in the construction of nine broad categories of themes relating to anatomy outreach: types of outreach, specific activities, goals of outreach, subject benefit (why anatomy?), enablers, challenges, appraisal, motivators/drivers, and community perspectives from the immediate anatomy community and wider field (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and health professions education (HPE)). These results were constructed into a conceptual model of anatomy outreach. The findings suggest that anatomists view the subject matter as a socially connecting experience that can engage a wide variety of individuals. The multimodal nature of anatomy, combined with teaching expertise, lends well to productive outreach. Most 'outreachers' do not have a strong understanding of the impact of their activities, however, and operate on a level of optimism that activities will support diversity, belonging, and health/anatomical literacy.

The maintenance of classism in medical education: "time" as a form of social capital in first-generation and low-income medical students

As first generation (FG)/low income (LI) students enter the elite profession of medicine, schools make presumptions about how FGLI students allocate their time. However, their lives are markedly different compared to their peers. This study argues that while all forms of capital are necessary for success, time as a specific form keeps classism in place. Using constructivist grounded theory techniques, we interviewed 48 FGLI students to understand where, why and how they allocated their time, and the perceived impact it had on them. Using open coding and constant comparison, we developed an understanding of FGLI students' relationship to time and then contextualized it within larger conversations on how time is conceptualized in a capitalist system that demands time efficiency, and the activities where time is needed in medical school. When students discussed time, they invoked the concept of 'time famine;' having too much to do and not enough time. In attempting to meet medicine's expectations, they conceptualized time as something that was 'spent' or 'given/taken' as they traversed different marketplaces, using their time as a form of currency to make up for the social capital expected of them. This study shows that because medical education was designed around the social elite, a strata of individuals who have generational resources, time is a critical aspect separating FGLI students from their peers. This study undergirds the idea that time is a hidden organizational framework that helps to maintain classism, thus positioning FGLI students at a disadvantage.

Voices of Silence: Experiences in Disseminating Scholarship as a Global South Researcher

Issue: There is an unspoken requirement that medical education researchers living in the Global South must disseminate their work using dominant frames constructed by individuals living in the Global North. As such, the published literature in our field is dominated by researchers whose work primarily benefits the Western world, casting the rest of what is published as localized and unhelpful knowledge. In this article, we use Audre Lorde's conception of the Master's house as a metaphor to narrate the experiences of two South African medical education researchers trying to disseminate their work into North American venues. In addition to narrating these stories, we describe the personal and professional consequences they experienced as a result of their efforts. Evidence: For researchers working outside of the Global North, entering the Master's formidable house is daunting, and there is no clear pathway in. These narratives illustrate how reviewers and editorial staff act as gatekeepers, continuously shaping ideas about what it means to do acceptable research, and who is allowed to disseminate it within the field. These narratives also show that those who have been rejected by these gatekeepers are often conflicted about their position within the larger field of medical education. Implications: To begin to address this issue, we have made several suggestions for the research community to consider. First, medical education research journals need to create spaces for researchers publishing from the Global South. One suggestion is for journals to create a submission type that is dedicated to researchers working outside of North America. Second, journals should also include more Global South editors and reviewers to help with knowledge translation when articles are submitted from outside North America. If our collective goal is to improve the training of physicians and the health outcomes of humanity, then we need to renovate the Master's house and begin to break down the barriers that separate us from truly building together.

Using a mixed methods grounded theory methodology to explain neonatal nurses' professional quality of life

BACKGROUND

Nurse researchers are constantly seeking novel methods of maintaining philosophical congruence while advancing their knowledge of the human condition using paradigmatically diverse means.

AIM

To provide an overview of the research philosophies underpinning the mixed methods grounded theory (MM-GT) methodology, illustrate its optimal use and introduce a quality-appraisal tool being developed with reference to extant literature.

DISCUSSION

The utility of MM-GT has been effectively demonstrated in the nursing and health literature. Yet, there are examples of how it has been under-used and sub-optimally applied. This article includes a two-phase MM-GT study protocol guided by a pragmatic research philosophy and best practice recommendations that aims to explain neonatal nurses' professional quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Optimal use of MM-GT's five essential components - purposive sampling, constant comparative methods with iterative coding and analysis, theoretical saturation, memoing and theory development - combine to produce high-quality, defensible research outputs and new nursing theory.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Research outputs, such as publication and presentation, expounding the multifactorial influences affecting neonatal nurses' professional quality of life will not only benefit the neonatal nursing community but also contribute to the corpus of nursing and midwifery research and enhance the health, well-being and retention of nurses and midwives more broadly.

'Whispers and shadows': A critical review of the professional identity literature with respect to minority physicians

OBJECTIVES

Professional identity formation (PIF) is a growing area of research in medical education. However, it is unclear whether the present research base is suitable for understanding PIF in physicians considered to be under-represented in medicine (URM). This meta-ethnography examined the qualitative PIF literature from 2012 to 2019 to assess its capacity to shine light on the experiences of minoritised physicians.

METHODS

Data were gathered using a search of six well-known medical education journals for the term 'professional identit*' in titles, keywords, abstracts and subheadings, delineated with the date range of 2012-2019. All non-relevant abstracts were removed and papers were then further reduced to those that focused only on learners' experiences. This left 67 articles in the final dataset, which were analysed using a collaborative approach among a team of researchers. The team members used their professional expertise as qualitative researchers and personal experiences as minoritised individuals to synthesise and interpret the PIF literature.

RESULTS

Four conceptual categories were identified as impacting PIF: Individual versus Sociocultural Influences; the Formal versus the Hidden Curriculum; Institutional versus Societal Values; and Negotiation of Identity versus Dissonance in Identity. However, a major gap was identified; only one study explored experiences of PIF in URM physicians and there was an almost complete absence of critical stances used to study PIF. Combined, these findings suggest that PIF research is building on existing theories without questioning their validity with reference to minoritised physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

From a post-colonial perspective, the fact that race and ethnicity have been largely absent, invisible or considered irrelevant within PIF research is problematic. A new line of inquiry is needed, one that uses alternative frameworks, such as critical theory, to account for the ways in which power and domination influence PIF for URM physicians in order to foreground how larger sociohistorical issues influence and shape the identities of minoritised physicians.

The Hiker's Guide to the RIME Supplement: Choosing Directions in Research

In this Commentary, the authors seek to build on prior RIME commentaries by considering how researchers transition from worldviews, focal lengths, and research goals to research directions and methodological choices. The authors use the analogy of a hiker to illustrate how different researchers studying a similar phenomenon can choose among different research directions, which lead down different paths and offer different perspectives on a problem. Following the hiker analogy, the authors use the "Research Compass" to categorize the 15 research papers included in the 2020 Research in Medical Education supplement according to their research aim and corresponding methodological approach. The authors then discuss implications of the relative balance of these study types within this supplement and within health professions education research at large, emphasizing the critical importance of studying a topic from multiple vantage points to construct a richer and more nuanced understanding of health professions education challenges. The authors conclude by recognizing the challenges we face in the current era of COVID-19 and by calling health professions education researchers and practitioners to continue our collective efforts to improve learner education and patient care, as we together navigate the unfamiliar terrain of the present day.

Re-visioning Academic Medicine Through a Constructionist Lens

Constructionism in academic medicine matters. It encourages educators and researchers to question taken-for-granted assumptions, paying close attention to socially and historically contingent meanings. In this Invited Commentary, the authors explain what constructionism is; examine its ontological, epistemological, and axiological underpinnings; and outline its common methodologies and methods. Although constructivism favors the individual, constructionism privileges the social as the controlling force behind the construction of meaning. Where micro-constructionism attends to the minutiae of language, macro-constructionism focuses on broader discourses reproduced through material and social practices and structures. While social constructionists might situate themselves at any point on the relativist-realist continuum, many constructionists focus on constructionism as epistemology (the nature of knowledge) rather than ontology (the nature of reality). From an epistemological standpoint, constructionism asserts that how we come to know the world is constructed through social interaction. Constructionism thus values language, dialogue, and context, in addition to internal coherence between epistemology, methodology, and methods. Constructionism similarly values the concepts of dependability, authenticity, credibility, confirmability, reflexivity, and transferability. It also embraces the researcher-researched relationship. Given the privileging of language, qualitative methodologies and methods are key in constructionism, with constructionist-type questions focusing on how people speak. Here, the authors encourage the reader to develop an understanding of constructionism to re-vision academic medicine through a constructionist lens.

A Medical Science Educator's Guide to Selecting a Research Paradigm: Building a Basis for Better Research

A research paradigm, or set of common beliefs about research, should be a key facet of any research project. However, despite its importance, there is a paucity of general understanding in the medical sciences education community regarding what a research paradigm consists of and how to best construct one. With the move within medical sciences education towards greater methodological rigor, it is now more important than ever for all educators to understand simply how to better approach their research via paradigms. In this monograph, a simplified approach to selecting an appropriate research paradigm is outlined. Suggestions are based on broad literature, medical education sources, and the author's own experiences in solidifying and communicating their research paradigms. By assisting in detailing the philosophical underpinnings of individuals research approaches, this guide aims to help all researchers improve the rigor of their projects and improve upon overall understanding in research communication.