Comment le rôle de défenseur de la santé est-il reflété dans la littérature sur la formation des professionnels de la santé : protocole de revue de la portée
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.82101Résumé
Le Rôle de Promoteur de la santé demeure complexe à enseigner, à évaluer et à étudier. Une cartographie de la littérature sur l'éducation des professions de la santé (l'EPS), tout en tenant compte de l'influence du contexte, peut permettre une compréhension plus nuancée de la manière dont ce rôle est conceptualisé et mis en œuvre dans le paysage de l'EPS. Cette revue de portée vise à soutenir la mise en œuvre contextualisée du Rôle de Promoteur de la Santé.
Références
1. Frank J, Snell L, Sherbino J, editors. CanMEDS 2015 physician competency framework. Ottawa: Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada; 2015.
2. Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. CanMEDS-FM 2017: a competency framework for family physicians across the continuum. Mississauga (ON): College of Family Physicians of Canada; 2017. Available from: https://www.cfpc.ca/CFPC/media/Resources/Medical-Education/CanMEDS-Family-Medicine-2017-ENG.pdf. [Accessed on April 2, 2025]
3. Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. History of CanMEDS. Available from: https://www.royalcollege.ca/en/canmeds/about-canmeds/history-canmeds.html. [Accessed on Dec 6, 2023].
4. Luft LM. The essential role of physician as advocate: how and why we pass it on. Can Med Educ J. 2017;8(3):e109–16. https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.36925
5. Bhate TD, Loh LC. Building a generation of physician advocates: the case for including mandatory training in advocacy in Canadian medical school curricula. Acad Med. 2015;90(12):1602–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000841
6. Hubinette M, Dobson S, Scott I, Sherbino J. Health advocacy. Med Teach. 2017;39(2):128–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1245853
7. McDonald M, Lavelle C, Wen M, Sherbino J, Hulme J. The state of health advocacy training in postgraduate medical education: a scoping review. Med Educ. 2019;53(12):1209–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13929
8. Agrawal N, Lucier J, Ogawa R, Arons A. Advocacy curricula in graduate medical education: an updated systematic review from 2017 to 2022. J Gen Intern Med. 2023;38(12):2792–807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-023-08244-x
9. Howell BA, Kristal RB, Whitmire LR, et al. A systematic review of advocacy curricula in graduate medical education. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34(11):2592–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-05184-3
10. Scott MD, McQueen S, Richardson L. Teaching health advocacy: a systematic review of educational interventions for postgraduate medical trainees. Acad Med. 2020;95(4):644–56. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003063
11. Dhatt A, Fazelipour M, Sun T, Nemir A, Wilbur K. Health advocacy: a gulf between instruction and practice. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2024;16(5):335–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2024.01.001
12. Smith T, Harris J, Woznitza N, Maresse S, Sale C. Conceptualisation of the characteristics of advanced practitioners in the medical radiation professions. J Med Radiat Sci. 2015;62(3):204–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.115
13. van Staden D, Duma S. The teaching, learning and assessment of health advocacy in a South African college of health sciences. S Afr J High Educ. 2022;36(5):276–90. https://doi.org/10.20853/36-5-4127
14. Breton J, Francescutti LH, Al-Weshahi Y. Teaching the role of health advocate: reflections on two cross-cultural collaborative advocacy workshops for medical trainees and instructors in Oman. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2018;18(3):e286–90. https://doi.org/10.18295/squmj.2018.18.03.004
15. Ringsted C, Hansen TL, Davis D, Scherpbier A. Are some of the challenging aspects of the CanMEDS roles valid outside Canada? Med Educ. 2006;40(8):807–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02525.x
16. Li P, Jiang F, Yin L, et al. Perceptions of the CanMEDS competencies of faculty and students in different curriculum systems of a medical school in China. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2022;13:1061–70. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S367129
17. Endres K, Burm S, Weiman D, et al. Navigating the uncertainty of health advocacy teaching and evaluation from the trainee’s perspective. Med Teach. 2022;44(1):79–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2021.1967905
18. LoGiudice AB, Sibbald M, Monteiro S, et al. Intrinsic or invisible? An audit of CanMEDS roles in entrustable professional activities. Acad Med. 2022;97(8):1213–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004731
19. Hubinette MM, Ajjawi R, Dharamsi S. Family physician preceptors’ conceptualizations of health advocacy: implications for medical education. Acad Med. 2014;89(11):1502. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000479
20. Hubinette MM, Scott I, van der Goes T, Kahlke R. Learner conceptions of health advocacy: “going above & beyond” or “kind of an expectation.” Med Educ. 2021;55(8):933–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14526
21. Maloney DPD, Moodie R, Daube M, Wilson AN. Are Australian junior doctors failing to act as health advocates? A qualitative analysis. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2022;46(4):527–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.13266
22. LaDonna KA, Kahlke R, Scott I, van der Goes T, Hubinette M. Grappling with key questions about assessment of the health advocate role. Can Med Educ J. 2023;14(1):80–9. https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.73878
23. LaDonna KA, Watling CJ, Cristancho SM, Burm S. Exploring patients’ and physicians’ perspectives about competent health advocacy. Med Educ. 2021;55(4):486–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14408
24. Oosthoek WRW, Cecilio-Fernandes D, Engel MFM, et al. Bringing together conceptualisations of the health advocacy competence across the continuum of medical education: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open. 2025;15(7):e097894. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-097894
25. Scott I, Hubinette M, van der Goes T, Kahlke R. Through a tainted lens: a qualitative study of medical learners’ thinking about patient “deservingness” of health advocacy. Perspect Med Educ. 2024;13(1):151–9. https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.1314
26. Kahlke R, Scott I, van der Goes T, Hubinette MM. Health advocacy among medical learners: unpacking contextual barriers and affordances. Med Educ. 2023;57(7):658–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15001
27. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
28. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
29. Peter JG, Zijenah LS, Chanda D, et al. Effect on mortality of point-of-care, urine-based lipoarabinomannan testing to guide tuberculosis treatment initiation in HIV-positive hospital inpatients: a pragmatic, parallel-group, multicountry, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10024):1187–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01092-2
30. Thomas A, Lubarsky S, Durning SJ, Young ME. Knowledge syntheses in medical education: demystifying scoping reviews. Acad Med. 2017;92(2):161–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001452
31. Krippendorff K. Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2004.
Téléchargements
Publié
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
© Khoa Duong, Andrea Quaiattini, Meredith Young 2025
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.
La soumission d’un manuscrit original à la revue constitue une indication qu’il s’agit d’un travail original, qu’il n’a jamais été publié et qu’il n’est pas envisagé pour publication dans une autre revue. S’il est accepté, il sera publié en ligne et ne pourra l’être ailleurs sous la même forme, à des fins commerciales, dans quelque langue que ce soit, sans l’accord de l’éditeur.
La publication d’une recherche scientifique a pour but la diffusion de connaissances et, sous un régime sans but lucratif, ne profite financièrement ni à l’éditeur ni à l’auteur.
Les auteurs qui publient dans la Revue canadienne d’éducation médicale acceptent de publier leurs articles sous la licence Creative Commons Paternité - Pas d’utilisation commerciale, Pas de modification 4.0 Canada. Cette licence permet à quiconque de télécharger et de partager l’article à des fins non commerciales, à condition d’en attribuer le crédit aux auteurs. Pour plus de détails sur les droits que les auteurs accordent aux utilisateurs de leur travail, veuillez consulter le résumé de la licence et la licence complète.
