Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: All individuals and groups have blind spots that can create problems if unaddressed. The goal of this study was to examine blind spots in medical education from international perspectives.
UNASSIGNED: From December 2022 to March 2023, we distributed an electronic survey through international networks of medical students, postgraduate trainees, and medical educators. Respondents named blind spots affecting their medical education system and then rated nine blind spot domains from a study of U.S. medical education along five-point Likert-type scales (1 = much less attention needed; 5 = much more attention needed). We tested for differences between blind spot ratings by respondent groups. We also analyzed the blind spots that respondents identified to determine those not previously described and performed content analysis on open-ended responses about blind spot domains.
UNASSIGNED: There were 356 respondents from 88 countries, including 127 (44%) educators, 80 (28%) medical students, and 33 (11%) postgraduate trainees. At least 80% of respondents rated each blind spot domain as needing \'more\' or \'much more\' attention; the highest was 88% for \'Patient perspectives and voices that are not heard, valued, or understood.\' In analyses by gender, role in medical education, World Bank country income level, and region, a mean difference of 0.5 was seen in only five of the possible 279 statistical comparisons. Of 885 blind spots documented, new blind spot areas related to issues that crossed national boundaries (e.g. international standards) and the sufficiency of resources to support medical education. Comments about the nine blind spot domains illustrated that cultural, health system, and governmental elements influenced how blind spots are manifested across different settings.
UNASSIGNED: There may be general agreement throughout the world about blind spots in medical education that deserve more attention. This could establish a basis for coordinated international effort to allocate resources and tailor interventions that advance medical education.
UNASSIGNED: From December 2022 to March 2023, we distributed an electronic survey through international networks of medical students, postgraduate trainees, and medical educators. Respondents named blind spots affecting their medical education system and then rated nine blind spot domains from a study of U.S. medical education along five-point Likert-type scales (1 = much less attention needed; 5 = much more attention needed). We tested for differences between blind spot ratings by respondent groups. We also analyzed the blind spots that respondents identified to determine those not previously described and performed content analysis on open-ended responses about blind spot domains.
UNASSIGNED: There were 356 respondents from 88 countries, including 127 (44%) educators, 80 (28%) medical students, and 33 (11%) postgraduate trainees. At least 80% of respondents rated each blind spot domain as needing \'more\' or \'much more\' attention; the highest was 88% for \'Patient perspectives and voices that are not heard, valued, or understood.\' In analyses by gender, role in medical education, World Bank country income level, and region, a mean difference of 0.5 was seen in only five of the possible 279 statistical comparisons. Of 885 blind spots documented, new blind spot areas related to issues that crossed national boundaries (e.g. international standards) and the sufficiency of resources to support medical education. Comments about the nine blind spot domains illustrated that cultural, health system, and governmental elements influenced how blind spots are manifested across different settings.
UNASSIGNED: There may be general agreement throughout the world about blind spots in medical education that deserve more attention. This could establish a basis for coordinated international effort to allocate resources and tailor interventions that advance medical education.
摘要：
■所有个人和团体都有盲点，如果不解决，可能会产生问题。这项研究的目的是从国际角度研究医学教育中的盲点。
■从2022年12月到2023年3月，我们通过国际医学生网络分发了一项电子调查，研究生学员,和医学教育工作者。受访者命名了影响其医学教育系统的盲点，然后根据5点Likert型量表对美国医学教育研究中的9个盲点领域进行了评分（1=需要更少的关注；5=需要更多的关注）。我们测试了受访者群体盲点评分之间的差异。我们还分析了受访者确定的盲点，以确定先前未描述的盲点，并对有关盲点域的开放式响应进行了内容分析。
■来自88个国家的356名受访者，包括127名（44%）教育工作者，80名（28%）医学生，和33名(11%)研究生学员。至少有80％的受访者认为每个盲点领域都需要“更多”或“更多”关注；最高的是88％的患者观点和未听到的声音，估值，或理解。在按性别进行的分析中，在医学教育中的作用，世界银行国家收入水平，和区域,在279项可能的统计学比较中,仅有5项的平均差为0.5.记录了885个盲点，与跨国界问题（例如国际标准）和支持医学教育的资源充足有关的新盲点领域。关于九个盲点领域的评论说明了文化，卫生系统,政府因素影响了盲点在不同环境中的表现。
■关于医学教育中的盲点，全世界可能会达成普遍共识，值得更多关注。这可以为协调国际努力分配资源和调整干预措施以促进医学教育奠定基础。
■从2022年12月到2023年3月，我们通过国际医学生网络分发了一项电子调查，研究生学员,和医学教育工作者。受访者命名了影响其医学教育系统的盲点，然后根据5点Likert型量表对美国医学教育研究中的9个盲点领域进行了评分（1=需要更少的关注；5=需要更多的关注）。我们测试了受访者群体盲点评分之间的差异。我们还分析了受访者确定的盲点，以确定先前未描述的盲点，并对有关盲点域的开放式响应进行了内容分析。
■来自88个国家的356名受访者，包括127名（44%）教育工作者，80名（28%）医学生，和33名(11%)研究生学员。至少有80％的受访者认为每个盲点领域都需要“更多”或“更多”关注；最高的是88％的患者观点和未听到的声音，估值，或理解。在按性别进行的分析中，在医学教育中的作用，世界银行国家收入水平，和区域,在279项可能的统计学比较中,仅有5项的平均差为0.5.记录了885个盲点，与跨国界问题（例如国际标准）和支持医学教育的资源充足有关的新盲点领域。关于九个盲点领域的评论说明了文化，卫生系统,政府因素影响了盲点在不同环境中的表现。
■关于医学教育中的盲点，全世界可能会达成普遍共识，值得更多关注。这可以为协调国际努力分配资源和调整干预措施以促进医学教育奠定基础。
