背景:有效的指导是医学教育的重要组成部分,对所有利益相关者都有好处。近年来,导师的概念化已经超越了传统的二元经验导师-新手导师关系,包括小组和同伴指导。现有的导师理论不承认导师的个性化,不断发展,目标驱动,和特定于环境的性质。论证了传统因果观念的局限性,这篇综述的目的是系统地搜索文献,以确定指导是否可以被视为一个复杂的适应系统(CAS)。
方法:使用Krishna的系统循证方法进行了系统的范围审查,以研究医学生和居民在普通内科和相关亚专业中的指导和CAS的陈述2000年1月1日至12月31日在PubMed上发表的文章,Embase,PsycINFO,ERIC,谷歌学者,和Scopus数据库。纳入的文章进行了主题和内容分析,确定并组合主题以创建域,这是讨论的框架。
结果:审查了5,704份摘要,对134篇全文进行了评估,共纳入216篇文章。这些领域描述了指导关系和指导方法如何体现CAS的特征,并且指导通常表现为实践社区(CoP)。指导的类似CAS的功能通过CoP显示,有明显的界限,螺旋指导轨迹,以及纵向指导支持和评估过程。
结论:认识到作为CAS的指导需要重新思考设计,支持,评估,以及对导师的监督和导师的作用。需要进一步的研究,以更好地评估指导过程,并为导师提供最佳的培训和支持。
BACKGROUND: Effective mentorship is an important component of medical education with benefits to all stakeholders. In recent years, conceptualization of mentorship has gone beyond the traditional dyadic experienced mentor-novice mentee relationship to include group and peer mentoring. Existing theories of mentorship do not recognize mentoring\'s personalized, evolving, goal-driven, and context-specific nature. Evidencing the limitations of traditional cause-and-effect concepts, the purpose of this review was to systematically search the literature to determine if mentoring can be viewed as a complex adaptive system (CAS).
METHODS: A systematic scoping review using Krishna\'s Systematic Evidence-Based Approach was employed to study medical student and resident accounts of mentoring and CAS in general internal medicine and related subspecialties in articles published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2023 in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases. The included articles underwent thematic and content analysis, with the themes identified and combined to create domains, which framed the discussion.
RESULTS: Of 5,704 abstracts reviewed, 134 full-text articles were evaluated, and 216 articles were included. The domains described how mentoring relationships and mentoring approaches embody characteristics of CAS and that mentorship often behaves as a community of practice (CoP). Mentoring\'s CAS-like features are displayed through CoPs, with distinct boundaries, a spiral mentoring trajectory, and longitudinal mentoring support and assessment processes.
CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing mentorship as a CAS demands the rethinking of the design, support, assessment, and oversight of mentorship and the role of mentors. Further study is required to better assess the mentoring process and to provide optimal training and support to mentors.