Seeing with greater clarity: Stakeholder ratings of blind spots in U.S. medical education

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

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 languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)580-583
Number of pages4
JournalMedical teacher
Volume46
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 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