Abstract
Background: Although medical education is affected by numerous blind spots, there is limited evidence to determine which blind spots to prioritize. Methods: In summer 2022, we surveyed stakeholders from U.S. medical education who had identified 9 domains and 72 subdomains of blind spots. Respondents used 4-point Likert-type scales to rate the extent and magnitude of problems caused for each domain and subdomain. Respondents also provided comments for which we did content analysis. Results: A total of 23/27 (85%) stakeholders responded. The majority of respondents rated each blind spot domain as moderate-major in both extent and problems they cause. Patient perspectives and voices that are not heard, valued, or understood was the domain with the most stakeholders rating extent (n = 20, 87%) and problems caused (n = 23, 100%) as moderate or major. Admitting and selecting learners likely to practice in settings of highest need was the subdomain with the most stakeholders rating extent (n = 21, 91%) and problems caused (n = 22, 96%) as moderate or major. Respondents’ comments suggested blind spots may depend on context and persist because of hierarchies and tradition. Discussion: We found blind spots differed in relative importance. These data may inform further research and direct interventions to improve medical education.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 580-583 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Medical teacher |
| Volume | 46 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2024 |
Keywords
- Biases
- blind spots
- innovation
- medical education reform
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Education
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Seeing with greater clarity: Stakeholder ratings of blind spots in U.S. medical education'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS