Home   Program  

Plenary Sessions & Workshops

  Speakers   Committees   Objectives   About Qatar   FAQs   Contact Us    

Program >> Sunday, January 21 - 22

Registration Form in Intra-Conference Workshops on January 21 – 22, 2012 :

Pre-registration in Intra-conference Workshop is mandatory.
All applicants must complete the registration online and pay required fees.
Applicants who don’t complete the registration and pay the conference registration fees will not have guaranteed seats in intra-conference workshops.
Number of seats is limited to 35 applicants per workshop.
Applicant is allowed to attend one workshop in each period of time.

B. Intra-conference Workshops held on January 21, 2012 in QNCC

WS 1
Stress, Balance, and the Dynamics of Change
Timothy P Brigham, PhD

In this workshop we will examine the nature, causes, and effect of physician/resident stress. In addition, we will explore healthy methods of coping with stress with a special focus on building and maintaining a support system and understanding and utilizing the dynamics of change necessary to manage stress more effectively.

WS 2
Competency-based Medical Education and Milestones
Eric Holmboe, MD

Competency-based medical education (CBME), as a strategy to improve medical education, is gaining momentum worldwide. This interactive workshop will examine the outcomes-based focus of CBME, including the theory and evidence supporting CBME as a potentially transformative educational framework. However, to realize the full potential of CBME and transform medical education will require greater attention to training program design and assessment. Participants, through small group exercises, will work the concepts of Milestones and Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) and early lessons from several initiatives in the U.S. and Europe will be shared. The workshop will also provide participants with an opportunity to develop some draft milestones and EPAs for their own specialty. The workshop will close with a conversation on the importance of an assessment system, including the need to involve multiple perspectives and both quantitative and qualitative methods, to ensure the success of CBME.

WS 3
Incorporating Quality Improvement in Graduate Medical Education
Dr. Nirav Vakharia, Director, Qatar Quality Team
Partners Healthcare, Boston, USA

Dr. Shakil Ahmed, Assistant Medical Director for Quality and Patient Safety
Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar

Physician involvement, and even leadership, in quality improvement (QI) activities is increasing. As the physician’s role evolves towards adding QI to an already busy set of activities in clinical care, teaching and research, training the next generation of physicians in the principles and practices of QI has become necessary. This is reflected in the required demonstration of QI knowledge and activity in board certification for certain specialties. It is further evidenced by the inclusion of two ACGME competencies: Systems-Based Practice (SBP) and Practice-Based Learning and Improvement (PBLI), which are amongst the more challenging competencies for residency programs to meet due to the lack of sufficient numbers of physician mentors in QI, the lack of evidence-based pedagogical strategies in QI, difficulty in applying QI principles to practice during residency, and curricula that are already overflowing with mandatory content.

Both SPB and PBLI do not easily lend themselves to traditional educational models, but the ACGME advocates for competency driven education that is explicit, criteria-driven, focuses on accountability, grounded in “real-life” experiences, fosters self-assessment, and is individualized. In general residents will be engaged in quality improvement if they have effective curricula, role models, and mentors; if there is an infrastructure that embeds QI in their daily experiences; and if QI can be made appealing to them.

The workshop is intended to orient medical educators to quality improvement and to explore some practical strategies for how to incorporate QI training it into residency curricula. It is presented as three 30-minute modules with the associated objectives:

  1. Introduction to quality improvement
          a. Review the history of QI in healthcare
          b. Understand the need for physician engagement in QI activities
  2. Survey of worldwide efforts to incorporate QI training into GME curricula
          a. Compare and contrast multiple residency QI curricula from around the world
          b. Review the evidence for impact on learning and patient care improvement as a result of
              established QI curricula
          c. Discuss strategies for involving residents in QI projects
  3. Case study: the HMC experience with QI training
          a. Discuss opportunities for integration of QI training into institutional QI objectives: balancing
              top down and bottom up approaches
          b. Review the introductory series of QI workshops delivered to HMC faculty and trainees
          c. Evaluate HMC’s experiential learning approach to developing a core faculty in QI
          d. Share participant experiences in developing QI training within their programs

Wherever possible, group discussions and activities will be employed to ensure that participants are able to share their own experiences in this topic with other workshop attendees.

WS 4

Ask-Tell-Ask: A Tastier Feedback Sandwich

Presenters: Lyuba Konopasek, MD
Associate Professor of Pediatrics
Associate Dean for Medical Education, WCMC-Q

Stephen Scott, MD
Associate Professor of Family Medicine
Assistant Dean for Clinical Curriculum & Medical Student Education, WCMC-Q

Ibrahim Hassan, MD
Consultant, Pulmonary/Critical Care, Medicine Department
Associate Program Director of Internal Medicine, HMC

Giving effective feedback is an essential skill for teachers and educational managers such as residency program directors. Drawing on the communication skills literature's Ask-Tell-Ask (ATA) model for information sharing, we have developed a model for giving feedback that incorporates self-assessment and encourages reflective practice. This approach promotes individualized, learner-centered feedback and facilitates a more accurate assessment of the learner's issues. It also encourages the generation of multiple strategies for improvement, which are learner driven and teacher guided.

The primary goals of this workshop are to train participants in the ATA model and to provide them with tools and strategies to disseminate this model in their own institutions. After a brief presentation of the model, participants will work in small groups to analyze video clips demonstrating its application. Next, they will practice using the ATA technique to provide feedback to learners across the continuum of medical education on issues related to professionalism, practice based learning, communication skills, and patient care. Participants will practice feedback giving in small groups with “standardized students and residents”. Strategies for eliciting feedback from learners will also be discussed. At the conclusion of the workshop, participants will be given a tool kit of resources and will outline how they plan to use or disseminate this model in their own institution.

WS 5
Integration of Basic and Clinical Sciences in the Medical College Curriculum: The Brain and Mind Course

Presenters: Leopold J. Streletz, MD (Organizer/Moderator)
Associate Professor of Neurology
Course Director, Brain and Mind Course, WCMC-Q

Basim Uthman, M.D.
Professor & Vice-chair, Neurology
Assoc. Director, Brain and Mind Course, WCMC-Q

Ziad Kronfol, M.D.
Professor of Psychiatry
Assoc. Director, Brain and Mind, WCMC-Q

Wafaa Al Yazeedi, M.D.
A/Chairperson & Program Director, Physical Medicine & Rehab, HMC

The primary goal of this workshop will be to open a dialogue with the audience with regard to the pros and cons of a completely integrated undergraduate medical education curriculum. In a model organ system approach, we at WCMC-Q incorporate both basic sciences and clinical Neurosciences into our curriculum to enhance our medical student’s ability to seek, synthesize and integrate medical knowledge and skills. This is accomplished in a 12 week block in the fourth year of our 6 year medical curriculum which itself has a fair degree of vertical integration of Neuroscience teaching. The core of the Brain and Mind Course is a series of 10 Neuro-Psychiatric problem-based small group sessions, facilitated by Neurologists and Psychiatrists. Anatomical dissection of the head and neck region, including the brain, is postponed from the 3rd yr. to this course in the 4th yr. Using state of the art audiovisual recording technology and web-based learning, the medical student’s lectures and laboratories become more interactive and learner’s time can be used more efficiently. We draw on our local expertise and resources in Neurology, Psychiatry and Rehabilitation Medicine to demonstrate key clinical concepts and motivate the students. Though this workshop focuses on only one organ system, the brain and mind, we feel strongly that it is reasonable to extrapolate this approach to others systems, including cardiopulmonary, musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal or genitourinary systems.

WS 6
Teaching different levels of learners jointly; simple strategies leading to success

Presenters: Amal Khidir, M.D
Assistant Professor, Pediatrics, WCMC-Qatar

Marcellina Mian, M.D.
Professor of Pediatrics,
Director for Special Projects, WCMC-Qatar

Ahmad Al-Hammadi, M.D.
Consultant, Pediatrics, HMC

Magda Wagdy, M.D.
Consultant, Pediatrics Department, HMC

To teach effectively learners at different levels jointly, at the end of this workshop the participant should be able to do the following:
          1. Establish an agreeable and stimulating learning environment
          2. Evaluate and respond to the needs of learners while teaching
          3. Utilize different teaching tools/methods as well as degrees of patient and/or topic

Although in most of clinical settings having more than one level of learner is reality, it still is a challenge across the world. Different instructors have different experiences and use various methods. A previous needs assessment of HMC pediatric faculty demonstrated an interest in learning more on how to teach different levels of learners. The literature indicates an agreeable and welcoming environment will allow each learner to maximize his or her openness to participation yet defining and establishing a positive environment can be a challenge. This can create difficulties for junior learners who are more vulnerable. Adult learning theory says that beginners and more advanced learners have different needs, levels of prior knowledge, and ability to understand more complex concepts. Teachers, therefore, must recognize where their learners stand with regards to their knowledge, skills or attitudes on the topic under discussion. Strategies and tools are available to help teachers tailor their instruction practically to achieve maximal involvement of all learners and good outcomes in medical education.

WS 7
“Leadership for Medical Education”
Dr. Brownell Anderson

“Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it” - Dwight D. Eisenhower
Much has been written about the qualities of effective leadership and the qualities of the effective leader apply equally well in medical education as they do in business. In this interactive workshop, participants will:
 Consider the necessary elements in an institutional climate to foster thoughtful and creative attention to medical education
 Identify qualities of effective leadership for the continuous improvement of the educational programs of the institution.
 Understand the role of funding in supporting the educational mission of the institution
Working in small groups, using case studies, participants will have the opportunity to consider their own leadership qualities, how they relate to the institutional culture and identify opportunities for leadership in medical education at their institution.

WS 8
Teaching and assessing professionalism
Trudie Roberts, BSc., MB.ChB., PhD., FRCP

In recent years it has become apparent that professionalism is not automatically developed by medical students merely by being in medical school but it needs to be actively taught and assessed. This workshop will draw upon work from the Royal College of Physicians on professionalism, the General Medical Council’s work on student fitness to practice in addition to current research work. Participants will be involved in working on definitions of professionalism for their own context as well as a range of teaching and assessment models to ensure that students develop suitable professional attitudes and behaviors. Finally the issues around remediation will be briefly examined.

WS 9
Integrating Principles of Social Accountability into Accreditation Standards and Systems
Robert F Woollard, MD, CCFP, FCFP

After a definition of the “social accountability of medical schools has been proposed together with a brief outline of current examples of accreditation principles and systems, participants will participate in a facilitated exchange of experiences and perspectives on integrating the Global Consensus for Social Accountability of Medical Schools <http://healthsocialaccountability.org/> into the various national and regional health professional accreditation systems represented at the workshop. From this discussion, principles of engagement and implementation will be derived for application around the world.

WS 10

Using hybrid OSCEs to Promote Culturally Competent Women’s Healthcare in Qatar

Presenters: Kristina Sole, MD, FACOG
Assistant Professor of Obstetrics & Gynecology, WCMC-Q

Joachim Dudenhausen, MD, FRCOG
Sidra Medical & Research Center

Badreldeen Ahmed, MD, FRCOG
Sr. Consultant, Obstetrics & Gynecology
Women’s Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation

Ms. Lan Sawan
Clinical Skills Center Coordinator, WCMC-Q

Medical students in the Middle East are faced with many barriers to gaining appropriate clinical experience, and understanding, when dealing with female patients, particularly in the fields of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Regional and cultural values may affect the type and quality of encounters between the students and their patients and reduce the opportunities for the students to gain sufficient, quality, clinical experience. Embarrassment, lack of understanding of the importance of sexual history-taking and inadequate training are just some of the issues involved.

Using an OSCE model of simulation training allows medical students to practice not only the physical skills of intimate examinations and procedures but also to practice the verbal skills so essential in this field. Tutors offering this kind of learning environment are able to teach approaches which will overcome cultural barriers in a sensitive and appropriate way and will equip their students to be better practitioners.

This kind of learning requires a lot of resources not only in equipment but also in manpower. However, the benefits are enhanced patient care, development of the concept of professionalism, and the creation of an academic climate that promotes culturally competent women’s healthcare. The focus of this workshop will be looking at how such a learning environment can be created and managed.

Medical students experience multiple barriers to Obstetrics and Gynecology patients, especially in the Middle East, where regional cultural values may limit students’ exposure to patients. Barriers to sexual-history taking include embarrassment, belief that the sex history is irrelevant, and feelings of inadequate training. Gender bias in the healthcare system can adversely affect medical students’ clinical experience. Female medical students perform significantly more breast and pelvic exams than male medical students.

Simulation is critically important in medical student education, training, and assessment. Using standardized patients, simulation equipment, or a combination of both, students can acquire a standard set of procedural skills and can learn otherwise culturally sensitive clinical skills in a low-risk, supportive environment. Basic communication skills such as sexual history taking, and appropriate language and behavior during a gynecologic exam can be taught and reinforced regularly. Hands-on obstetric training using birthing simulators, and breast and pelvic simulators, fosters a committed teacher-learner relationship. The interaction of teachers and learners in a simulation environment can enhance patient care, foster the concept of professionalism, and create an academic climate that promotes culturally competent women’s health care.

Objective Standard Clinical Exams (OSCE) can be used for both formative and summative assessment, and also allow for immediate and direct feedback to students. OSCE design can vary in the number of stations, tasks, activities, standardized patients, and level of faculty participation. In general, executing an OSCE requires a significant amount of resources. Creating a successful simulation experience involves the collaboration of individuals from a variety of backgrounds and talents, and requires management of a team-based approach to teaching and learning.

WS 11
How to Integrate Ethics into the Clinical Curriculum

Presenters: Dora J. Stadler, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine
Co-Director, Medicine Clerkship, WCMC-Qatar

Pablo Rodríguez del Pozo MD, JD, PhD
Associate Professor, Medical Ethics
Director, MPS III Clerkship, WCMC-Qatar

Azza Adel Ibrahim Hassan, MD
Head of Palliative Care Unit
Al Amal Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation

It is amply recognized that medicine is moral in its ends and technical in its means. Several studies on ethics curricula in undergraduate medical education have pointed out the need for longitudinal and horizontally integrated ethics education in the curriculum. Nevertheless, educational efforts are often directed toward the technical aspects of medicine, sometimes at the expense of overlooking an explicit approach to its moral dimension.

In this workshop, we will briefly review strategies that have been used to integrate an explicit ethical component into clinical education. We will then focus on our experiences with the Reflective Essay (RE), a methodology that consists of requesting students to write about an ethically puzzling case witnessed during a clinical rotation, and to discuss it later in a roundtable discussion setting. The RE has been successfully implemented at WCMC-Q as a strategy for incorporating an explicit ethical component into the clinical clerkships.

In this workshop participants will:
          1. Gain basic knowledge about the philosophy, contents and goals of an integrated ethics
              curriculum in medical education and familiarize themselves with the reflective essay as a
              valid curricular strategy in the clinical setting.
          2. Have hands-on experience on using this strategy by working on clinical vignettes based on
              scenarios observed in the local clinical context.
          3. Leave the workshop with at least three new ideas of how they can integrate an explicit
              ethics component into their area of teaching.

Intended audience
Educators in undergraduate and graduate medical education, as well as, from other health professions where ethical dilemmas are faced.

WS 12
Running A Successful Morning Report

Presenters: Dr. Ibrahim Hassan Fawzi
Associate Program Director of Internal Medicine, HMC

Dr. Salwa Mohd Abu Yaqoub
Sr. Consultant, Ob/Gyn. Women’s Hospital
Program Director, Ob/Gyn. Residency Training Program, HMC

Dr. Marcellina Mian
Professor of Pediatrics,
Director for Special Projects, WCMC-Qatar

Morning reports are a recognized opportunity for learning through case-based, peer-led scenarios and can be used to meet a variety of educational objectives.. This workshop looks at how, with careful selection and the use of supplemental resources, presenters can promote key messages and core objectives that will encourage learning.

Learning outcomes:
At the end of this workshop the participant should be able to:
          1. List the objectives of Morning Report
          2. Select appropriate cases to meet those objectives
          3. Utilize strategies to involve Morning Report participants in the discussion

Several articles on Morning Report indicate that this activity can have multiple objectives. Establishing and articulating the overall objective, as well as the learning objectives for each session clarifies the task for the presenter and the participants and contributes to its success. Studies have shown that learning can be facilitated through case–based, peer–led scenarios. These approaches foster independent reasoning and problem-solving skills. Appropriate selection of cases for presentation can facilitate achievement of the objectives set for each session. Setting time lines so that each session can be comfortably paced for each participant involved also adds to its success. The availability and strategic use of faculty, librarians or other professionals and online resources can assist in enriching the learning environment.

WS 13
Selection of Medical Students and Residents: Could we eliminate bias?

Presenters: Dr. Mohamed El-Tawil
Assistant Director of Medical Education, HMC

Basim Uthman, M.D.
Professor & Vice-chair, Neurology
Assoc. Director, Brain and Mind Course, WCMC-Q
1. Reflect on their experience with the resident’s selection process in their institutions.
2. Identify the challenges of conducting acceptable, fair and reliable selection process.
3. Identify the bias elements of the traditional interviews.
3. Describe the structure, and components of the MMI interviews.
4. Evaluate the structured MMI scenarios.
5. Identify the differences between Global scoring system and check list.

Selection procedures are arguably the highest stakes, stressful, contentious and resource-intensive of all medical and dental school assessments. In combination with measures of previous academic achievement, many schools have used structured interviews, claiming to assess important non-cognitive characteristics of candidates, such as values and commitment.(1) However, such interviews are biased, of limited value in predicting future performance, and therefore unfair when used as an important part of admission procedures.(2) The multiple mini-interviews (MMI)was initially designed to test non-cognitive characteristics related to professionalism in entry-level students. However, it may be testing cognitive reasoning skills. Candidates to medical and dental schools come from diverse backgrounds and it is important for the validity and fairness of the MMI that these background factors do not impact on their scores.(1)
MMI was developed by Mc Master in 2001Aiming to enhance predictive correlations with future performance in medical school, post-graduate medical training, and future performance in practice.
In this workshop we will present the history of the selection process of residents in our institution , in USA and the Middle East and reflect on the biases of the traditional selection process , the history of MMI used as an assessment tool for non cognitive traits of the students ,compare it to the traditional panel interviews and, reflect on the selection biases, review the MMI interviews process and structure and explore whether using MMI as an assessment tool for evaluating non cognitive abilities of the residents can improve the validity , reliability and fairness of the high stake selection process of residents in GME programs.
We will elicit the views of the participants in brain storming sessions, and a fish ball exercise using the MMI scenarios and the structured check list scoring system versus the global scoring system.
The participants will participate actively by reflecting on their overall experience and the challenges in their institutional policies and procedures for selecting residents.
          1. E Norman GR. Editorial: the morality of medical school admissions. Adv Health Sci Educ
          2. Kreiter CD, Yin P, Solow C, Brennan RL. Investigating the reliability of the medical school
              admissions interview. Adv Health Sci Educ 2004;9:147–59.
          3. www.ProFitHR.com

WS 14
Conducting Research in Medical Education: Getting it Started and Keeping it Going
Larry Gruppen, PhD

Medical education is a discipline that advances through both creative innovation and rigorous research. Conducting research in medical education is essential to providing an evidence base for curricular decisions, effective teaching, and high-quality assessment. However, promoting this research effort on the part of medical school faculty can be difficult and must address several challenges. This workshop will help participants analyze their own institutional environments for opportunities to conduct medical education research, diagnose possible obstacles to research, and creatively generate possible solutions to these problems. The workshop facilitator will share some 'best practices' of medical education units that are recognized for research productivity and explore the opportunities created by international collaborations.

C. Intra-Conference Workshops on January 22, 2012 in QNCC:

WS 15
Professionalism: How to Develop Surveys for Peers and Patients
John Norcini, PhD

There is a growing awareness of the importance of professionalism around the world and great interest in methods for assessing it, even though they are in their infancy. This workshop will familiarize participants with the range of methods currently available. In addition, it will focus on one of those methods, patient and peer questionnaires, and address the issues of deciding on content for the questionnaire, determining the scale and scoring procedures, specifying ways of developing reliable scores, and estimating the bias introduced by settings and patients. Active involvement will be encouraged throughout.

WS 16
Validity for Certification
Richard E Hawkins, MD

It is incumbent upon developers of examinations for licensure and certification to demonstrate the validity of those examinations. The framework for determining the validity of such examinations has evolved over time to a current model that involves developing an ‘argument’ in support of interpretations and/or decisions that are based on examination scores (Clauser, Margolis and Swanson, 2008). In this workshop, participants will work through a process for developing the validity argument for two forms of examinations currently used in certification processes – oral and written (multiple choice question) examinations. The validation process involves analysis of examination scores in the following areas: evaluating the veracity of examination scores; determining the generalizability of examination scores; assessing the relationship between scores and actual practice performance; and analyzing the process by which decisions and/or interpretations are made with regard to examination scores. Through discussion of these questions, workshop participants will understand the strengths and weakness of the validity argument for oral and written examinations and gain insight into how examination development, administration and scoring procedures can be improved to enhance score validity.

WS 17
Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) Workshop
Presenters: Mohamud A. Verjee, MD, CCFP

Assistant Professor of Family Medicine, WCMC-Q

Wanis Hamad Ibrahim, MD
Consultant, Medicine Department, HMC

The participants will be introduced to the concepts of an OSCE, with definitions of the term, a brief history of its origin, and the process of its development. Knowing how to write an OSCE will be an initial focus, and methods of validity and reliability will be discussed. The various forms of OSCEs currently in use will be explained.

Standardized Patients roles as part of the assessment team will be introduced, with mention of their training and “Standardized” performance, a key issue in the effectiveness of the OSCE. The range of advanced skills in portraying a scenario will be provided, and the practicalities of any credible and successful OSCE laid out.

How to prepare for an OSCE, the examiners’ roles and scoring with a checklist will be discussed. With respect to those participating, the three main areas of concentration will be data gathering, communication and interpersonal skills, and clarity of language. Pearls of communication – verbal and non-verbal will be revealed.

Using a template, participants will have an opportunity to see how to write an OSCE, discuss topics, develop essential questions, decide on essential examinations and clinical skills, learn about time management, understand the importance of developing a plan for care and management, summarising, appreciating differential diagnoses, and consider investigations.

The workshop will conclude with distribution of a complete OSCE scenario, with a history, a checklist of questions to be asked, essential clinical physical examinations, a summary, with an example of a write up after an OSCE interaction with a patient (SP).

Learning Outcomes:
At the end of this course, participants will be able to:
  1. Show Competence
          a. Describe concepts of an OSCE
          b. Recognize the involvement of communication skills and data gathering
  2. Understand Performance Issues
          a. Recognize the importance of time management
          b. Identify, illustrate scoring and checklists for OSCE assessment
          c. Understand the role of Standardized Patients
  3. Improve Outcomes
          a. Explain the benefit of focused interactions
          b. Be able to summarize the history
          c. Be able to construct an OSCE assessment

Intended Audience
Physicians from all backgrounds, nurses, and students

WS 18
Using the RIME (Reporter-Interpreter-Manager/Educator) Framework to Improve Formative and Summative Feedback

Presenters: Mai Mahmoud, MBBS
Assistant Professor of Medicine
Co-Director, Medicine Clerkship, WCMC-Q

Dora Stadler, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine
Co-Director, Medicine Clerkship, WCMC-Q

Samar Aboulsoud, MD
Specialist in Medical Education, HMC

There is ongoing need to improve the qualitative data and information gathered about trainees. Meaningful, descriptive, and standardized feedback is key for making grading and/or progress decisions as well as providing formative feedback to the trainees. The RIME (Reporter-Interpreter-Manager/Educator) scheme is a validated conceptual framework for assessing competence.

This workshop will provide a brief overview of the RIME synthetic framework and describe our experience introducing RIME to an international setting including the quality of the feedback, faculty development, and its effect on students’ grades. The majority of the workshop will be focused on introducing participants to this framework and providing them opportunity to assess trainee performance, give feedback and monitor progress through small group discussion, case vignettes, and role-play.

Learning Outcomes:
By the end of this workshop, participants will
1. Become familiar with the components of the RIME framework as a valid assessment tool both for formative and summative feedback in the clinical setting.
2. Have hands-on experience using the RIME scheme to assess medical student performance by reviewing case vignettes in small groups.
3. Have an opportunity to practice giving feedback based on the RIME scheme.

Intended Audience
Medical educators who work in the clinical setting (both undergraduate and graduate), and other health professionals interested in assessment.

WS 19
Giving Effective Feedback to Change Behaviour
Peter Katsufrakis, MD, MBA
National Board of Medical Examiners

This workshop will address the frequent request from learners to receive feedback by preparing faculty participants to be more effective when giving feedback. The presenter will briefly describe the Assessment of Professional Behaviors (APB) program developed by the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME), and use materials developed for the APB to illustrate principles of good feedback.
The session will begin with an overview of the APB program as an example of a multisource feedback system, to familiarize participants with the APB and set the stage for discussion of feedback. This overview will include a brief description of how the APB was developed, typical use in a medical school or residency training program, strengths and limitations of multisource feedback, and NBME experience to date with the APB.
The next part of the workshop will review principles of good feedback. This section will begin with a didactic review of types of feedback (reinforcing, corrective; task-level, motivational, self), conditions necessary for effective feedback, and a “script” to follow when giving feedback to a learner. Because the focus of feedback is often to effect behavior change, parallels will be drawn between participants’ experiences when motivating a patient to change behavior, e.g., stop smoking, and giving a learner feedback designed to change the learner’s behavior. This section will conclude with a review of 1-2 brief video segments; participants will be asked to critique the interactions, identifying the faculty member’s effective behaviors as well as aspects of the interaction that could be improved.
Following this, participants will be divided into groups of three to enable practice of concepts just learned. In each triad, one person will be the feedback provider, one will be the feedback recipient, and one will be the observer. Participants will be given a sample APB report and the feedback provider’s task will be to review the report with the feedback recipient. The observer will watch the interaction, and at the conclusion of the simulated feedback session, will reinforce the feedback provider’s effective behaviors and also identify any actions that might be improved. If time permits, this role play will be repeated three times to allow each participant to play each role.
At the conclusion of the workshop, the presenter will facilitate a discussion of the participants’ experiences, emphasizing any observations that reinforce good feedback principles. After this discussion, the presenter will re-summarize the principles of good feedback.

WS 20
Teaching and Learning Clinical Reasoning: Deliberate Strategies for Enhancing Competence
Presenters: Lyuba Konopasek, MD

Associate Dean for Medical Education, WCMC-Q

Ibrahim Hassan, MD
Associate Program Director of Internal Medicine, HMC

Stephen Scott, MD
Assistant Dean for Clinical Curriculum, WCMC-Q

The Carnegie Foundation report, Educating Physicians: A Call for Reform, proposes that clinical reasoning be taught and assessed deliberately in the context of clinical practice. However, few faculty have had formal training in this domain so faculty development is an essential step in implementing a clinical reasoning curriculum.

This workshop utilizes a variety of techniques to explore ways in which clinical reasoning can be taught and assessed effectively. Participants will be provided with a bibliography and toolbox of teaching and assessment resources.

Clinical reasoning is often learned in medical school via the implicit curriculum through apprenticeship training; faculty rarely teach clinical reasoning explicitly and students do not learn and practice it deliberately. Clinicians attain proficiency in this domain through experiential learning over years of practice. Experts use a blend of intuition (rapid unconscious thinking) and metacognition (deliberate, conscious thinking) to solve clinical problems, however, they seldom explain this process to the learner. The Carnegie Foundation report, Educating Physicians: A Call for Reform, proposes that clinical reasoning be taught and assessed deliberately in the context of clinical practice. However, few faculty have had formal training in this domain, and thus, faculty development is an essential step in implementing a clinical reasoning curriculum.

The workshop will include discussion, didactic presentations on theoretical models for clinical reasoning drawn from cognitive psychology and the work of Bowen, Bordage, Croskerry, and Eva. Interactive group discussion between participants where strategies for teaching and assessing clinical reasoning will be demonstrated and applied. These will include the SNAPPS model and Chart Stimulated Recall (CSR) for clinical teaching, as well as structured exercises for classroom teaching.

WS 21
Competency-based Medical Education and Milestones
Eric Holmboe, MD

Competency-based medical education (CBME), as a strategy to improve medical education, is gaining momentum worldwide. This interactive workshop will examine the outcomes-based focus of CBME, including the theory and evidence supporting CBME as a potentially transformative educational framework. However, to realize the full potential of CBME and transform medical education will require greater attention to training program design and assessment. Participants, through small group exercises, will work the concepts of Milestones and Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) and early lessons from several initiatives in the U.S. and Europe will be shared. The workshop will also provide participants with an opportunity to develop some draft milestones and EPAs for their own specialty. The workshop will close with a conversation on the importance of an assessment system, including the need to involve multiple perspectives and both quantitative and qualitative methods, to ensure the success of CBME.

WS 22
Evidence Based Medicine (EBM)

Presented by Dr. Kameshwar Prasad,

Professor of Neurology and Head of Unit-I (Stroke Unit), Neurosciences Centre
& Director, Clinical Epidemiology Unit
All India Institute of Medical Sciences, India

Dr. Mohamad El-Tawil,
Assistant Director, Medical Education Dept. HMC

Dr. Shaikha Al-Kubaisi,
Consultant Endodontist & Restrorative Dentistry

Dr. Manya Prasad,
Post-graduate Institute of Medical Science, Rohtak, India
To brainstorm what should be the curriculum and methodology for EBM teaching during residency

Target audience:
Curriculum planners, program directors, teachers of the residency programs

Current status of EBM curriculum and teaching in residency (example from a family medicine residency program)
Opportunities for teaching EBM during residency with practical examples
Discussion and conclusions