Educational approaches for social accountability in health professions training: a scoping review protocol
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.78911Metrics
References
World Health Organization. Towards unity for health: Challenges and opportunities for partnership in health development : a working paper / Charles Boelen. World Health Organization. 2000. Available at https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/66566
Boelen C. Building a socially accountable health professions school: towards unity for health. Educ Health. 2004;17(2), 223-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/13576280410001711049 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13576280410001711049
Ellaway R, Van Roy K, Preston R, et al. Translating medical school social missions to student experiences. Med Educ. 2018;52(2), 171-181. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13417 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13417
Dharamsi S, Espinoza N, Cramer C, et al. Nurturing social responsibility through community service-learning: lessons learned from a pilot project. Med Teach. 2010;32(11), 905-911. https://doi.org/10.3109/01421590903434169 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/01421590903434169
Jacklin K, Strasser R, Peltier I. From the community to the classroom: the Aboriginal health curriculum at the Northern Ontario School of Medicine. Can J Rural Med. 2014;19(4), 143-150.
Dubé TV, Cumyn A, Fourati M, et al. Pathways, journeys and experiences: Integrating curricular activities related to social accountability within an undergraduate medical curriculum. Med Educ. 2023. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15260 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15260
Boelen C, Woollard B. Social accountability and accreditation: a new frontier for educational institutions. Med Educ. 2009;43(9), 887-894. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03413.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03413.x
Committee on Accreditation of Canadian Medical Schools (CACMS). CACMS standards and elements: standards for accreditation of medical education programs leading to the M.D. degree. 2021. Ottawa, ON.
Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Intern J Soc Res Meth. 2005;8(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Impl Sci. 2010;5, 69. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P. et al. Chapter 11: scoping reviews. Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. 2020. Joanna Briggs Institute. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIRM-20-01 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIRM-20-01
Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern, C, et al. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methol. 2018;18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x
Zaccagnini M, Cameron E, Strasser R, Razack S, Dubé T. Tackling the nuances of social accountability: exploring the black box of teaching and learning experiences. 2024. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/P93KY
Gottlieb M, Haas MRC, Daniel M., et al. The scoping review: a flexible, inclusive, and iterative approach to knowledge synthesis. AEM Educ Train. 2021;5(3), e10609. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10609 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10609
Pollock D, Peters MDJ, Khalil H, et al. Recommendations for the extraction, analysis, and presentation of results in scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth. 2023;21(3), 520-532. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-22-00123 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-22-00123
Adams J, Hillier-Brown FC, Moore HJ, et al. Searching and synthesising 'grey literature' and 'grey information' in public health: critical reflections on three case studies. System Rev. 2016;5(1), 164. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0337-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0337-y
Thomas A, Lubarsky S, Durning SJ, Young ME. Knowledge syntheses in medical education: demystifying scoping reviews. Acad Med. 2017;92(2), 161-166. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001452 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001452
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Annals Inter Med. 2018;169(7), 467-473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis. A practical guide. London: SAGE Publications. 2021.
Jordan J, Shah K, Phillips AW, et al. Use of the "stepback" method for education research consultation at the national level: a pilot study. AEM Educ Train. 2019;3(4), 347-352. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10349 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10349
Patton, M. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 4th Edition, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks. 2015.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Marco Zaccagnini, Erin Cameron, Roger Strasser, Saleem Razack, Tim Dubé
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Submission of an original manuscript to the Canadian Medical Education Journal will be taken to mean that it represents original work not previously published, that it is not being considered elsewhere for publication. If accepted for publication, it will be published online and it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, for commercial purposes, in any language, without the consent of the publisher.
Authors who publish in the Canadian Medical Education Journal agree to release their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 Canada Licence. This licence allows anyone to copy and distribute the article for non-commercial purposes provided that appropriate attribution is given. For details of the rights an author grants users of their work, please see the licence summary and the full licence.
