Cargando…

Medical Students’ Socialization Tactics When Entering a New Clinical Clerkship: A Mixed Methods Study of Proactivity

Socialization into clinical clerkships is difficult in part due to ambiguity around students’ new roles and expected behaviors. Being proactive reduces ambiguity and is essential to socialization. Proactive behavior can be taught and goes beyond having a proactive personality. Among students enterin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Atherley, Anique, Hu, Wendy C.-Y., Dolmans, Diana, Teunissen, Pim W., Hegazi, Iman
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9126257/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35171118
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004627
Descripción
Sumario:Socialization into clinical clerkships is difficult in part due to ambiguity around students’ new roles and expected behaviors. Being proactive reduces ambiguity and is essential to socialization. Proactive behavior can be taught and goes beyond having a proactive personality. Among students entering new undergraduate clinical clerkships, this study aimed to investigate (1) reported proactive behaviors and their association with social integration and (2) enabling and inhibiting factors for proactive behavior. METHOD: This study was conducted at the 5-year MBBS program at Western Sydney University during academic year 2019–2020. Using a convergent mixed methods approach, survey and interview data from third-, fourth-, and fifth-year students were collected. Surveys explored 5 proactive behaviors: feedback seeking, information seeking, task negotiation, positive framing, and relationship building. Interviews elicited descriptions of how students described their proactivity and what influenced students to be proactive when entering a new clerkship. Data were integrated using the following the thread and mixed methods matrix techniques. RESULTS: Students exhibited all 5 proactive behaviors. Survey data showed positive framing and task negotiation had the highest and lowest scores, respectively. Only positive framing correlated significantly with social integration scores (r = 0.27; P < .01), but this contrasted to interviews, in which students described how other proactive behaviors also led to social integration. Proactive behavior scores decreased across academic years. Integrated data showed 3 linked antecedents to whether students exhibited proactive behavior: feeling capable of being proactive, individual intention to be proactive, and the immediate environment and system-level factors. CONCLUSIONS: Students who framed the experience positively were more likely to report increased social integration. Initiating task negotiation was challenging for most students. The authors propose a conceptual model for proactivity and social integration to support socialization and learning during clinical transitions for future research and interventional design.