Ok, while we congratulated the senior residents in our last piece, but let’s be honest, YOU (the junior faculty members) are the ones who TRULY should be congratulated. You’ve survived residency, and now you’re the boss!
You’re probably sighing with relief at the moment. But eventually, you’ll ask yourself: “Now, what’s next?” Well, yet again, the ALiEM MEdIC team has some resources for you!
The Case of the Terrible Code outlined a scenario where a resident observed a resuscitation that was not going well. Should he intervene even though the code leader was an attending? How? This month the MEdIC team (Brent Thoma, Sarah Luckett-Gatopoulos, Tamara McColl, Eve Purdy, John Eicken, and Teresa Chan), hosted a discussion around these questions with insights from the ALiEM community. We are proud to present to you the Curated Community Commentary and our 3 expert opinions. Thank-you to all our participants for contributing to the very rich discussions last week.
Welcome to season 3, episode 8 of the ALiEM Medical Education in Cases (MEdIC) series! Our team (Brent Thoma, Sarah Luckett-Gatopoulos, Tamara McColl, Eve Purdy, John Eicken, and Teresa Chan) is pleased to welcome you to our online community of practice where we discuss difficult medical education cases each month. As usual, the community discussion will be reviewed using qualitative research methods to produce a curated summary that will be combined with two expert responses to create a functional teaching resource.
In this month’s case a resident observes a code that is not going well. She should help, shouldn’t she? But she doesn’t want to offend the attending…
On February 1, 2016, the St Emlyn’s blog published a post by notable FOAMite Dr. Simon Carley (@EMManchester) that critiqued the Social Media Index (SMi) [/fusion_builder_column]
The Case of the Awkward Assessors outlined a scenario where faculty members are put in a difficult position as they try to provide negative feedback to a medical student working in the ED. What did the ALiEM community think of this case? This month the MEdIC team, led by Brent Thoma (@Brent_Thoma) and Teresa Chan (@TChanMD) hosted a MEdIC series discussion around this issue with insights from the ALiEM community. We are proud to present to you the Curated Community Commentary and our 2 expert opinions. Thank-you to all our participants for contributing to the very rich discussions last week.
Welcome to season 3, episode 4 of the ALiEM Medical Education in Cases (MEdIC) series! Our team (Brent Thoma, Sarah Luckett-Gatopoulos, Tamara McColl, Eve Purdy, and Teresa Chan) is pleased to welcome you to our online community of practice where we discuss difficult medical education cases each month. As usual, the community discussion will be reviewed using qualitative research methods to produce a curated summary that will be combined with two expert responses to create a functional teaching resource.
This month’s case features a couple of colleagues who are trying how to evaluate a medical student appropriate. How can we give critical feedback in a busy emergency department? What is our obligation as physicians in terms of reporting negative feedback to our institutions? Should learners who are uninterested in emergency medicine be held to a different standard? Please read the case and join in the discussion below!
The use of blogs and podcasts within health professions education is rapidly increasing, especially among emergency medicine and critical care learners [1-5]. However, there are no standardized quality assessment methods for the learners and educators that use and produce them. This dilemma led the MedEdLife Research Collaborative to launch a research agenda with the goal of developing a tool to assess the quality of blogs and podcasts. This was done through the series of studies that are presented in this blog.