Loading…

Stakeholders’ perception on the implementation of Developmental Progress Assessment: using the Theoretical Domains Framework to document behavioral determinants

Background The widespread implementation of longitudinal assessment (LA) to document trainees’ progression to independent practice rests more on speculative rather than evidence-based benefits. We aimed to document stakeholders’ knowledge of- and attitudes towards LA, and identify how the supports a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice 2022-08, Vol.27 (3), p.735-759
Main Authors: St-Onge, Christina, Boileau, Elisabeth, Langevin, Serge, Nguyen, Lily H. P., Drescher, Olivia, Bergeron, Linda, Thomas, Aliki
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-e33262b03f96ba22d6d4fed534838741899e0c419d861883a65893978f253dda3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-e33262b03f96ba22d6d4fed534838741899e0c419d861883a65893978f253dda3
container_end_page 759
container_issue 3
container_start_page 735
container_title Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice
container_volume 27
creator St-Onge, Christina
Boileau, Elisabeth
Langevin, Serge
Nguyen, Lily H. P.
Drescher, Olivia
Bergeron, Linda
Thomas, Aliki
description Background The widespread implementation of longitudinal assessment (LA) to document trainees’ progression to independent practice rests more on speculative rather than evidence-based benefits. We aimed to document stakeholders’ knowledge of- and attitudes towards LA, and identify how the supports and barriers can help or hinder the uptake and sustainable use of LA. Methods We interviewed representatives from four stakeholder groups involved in LA. The interview protocols were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which contains a total of 14 behaviour change determinants. Two team members coded the interviews deductively to the TDF, with a third resolving differences in coding. The qualitative data analysis was completed with iterative consultations and discussions with team members until consensus was achieved. Saliency analysis was used to identify dominant domains. Results Forty-one individuals participated in the study. Three dominant domains were identified. Participants perceive that LA has more positive than negative consequences and requires substantial ressources. All the elements and characteristics of LA are present in our data, with differences between stakeholders. Conclusion Going forward, we could develop and implement tailored and theory driven interventions to promote a shared understanding of LA, and maintain potential positive outcomes while reducing negative ones. Furthermore, ressources to support LA implementation need to be addressed to facilitate its uptake.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10459-022-10119-5
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2671275568</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1344804</ericid><sourcerecordid>2701323064</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-e33262b03f96ba22d6d4fed534838741899e0c419d861883a65893978f253dda3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctu1TAQhiMEohd4ASSQJTZsAr7HZlf1wkWVQKKsLZ94co7bJE5tp4hdX4Mtj8aT4HNSisQCydJYM98_M_ZfVc8Ifk0wbt4kgrnQNaa0JpgQXYsH1T4RDauJbJqH5c4UrbnWcq86SOkSY8yIUo-rPSYk5YzR_ernl2yvYBN6BzH9uv2BJogtTNmHEZWTN4D8MPUwwJjtku3QCdxAH6ZdrkefY1hHSAkdpVTCNvsWzcmP6538YgMhQvZtQU_CYP2Y0Fm0A3wL8QrlgFxo560IrWBjb3yIBXSQIQ5-tGNOT6pHne0TPL2Lh9XXs9OL4_f1-ad3H46PzuuW6SbXUN4j6QqzTsuVpdRJxztwgnHFVMOJ0hpwy4l2SpZfYFYKpYtSdVQw5yw7rF4tfacYrmdI2Qw-tdD3doQwJ0NlQ2gjhFQFffkPehnmOJbtDG0wYZRhyQtFF6qNIaUInZmiH2z8bgg2WwfN4qApDpqdg0YU0Yu71vNqAHcv-WNZAZ4vAETf3pdPPxLGucLbqWypp1Ib1xD_7vafsb8BQDOzpQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2701323064</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Stakeholders’ perception on the implementation of Developmental Progress Assessment: using the Theoretical Domains Framework to document behavioral determinants</title><source>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>Springer Nature</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>ERIC</source><creator>St-Onge, Christina ; Boileau, Elisabeth ; Langevin, Serge ; Nguyen, Lily H. P. ; Drescher, Olivia ; Bergeron, Linda ; Thomas, Aliki</creator><creatorcontrib>St-Onge, Christina ; Boileau, Elisabeth ; Langevin, Serge ; Nguyen, Lily H. P. ; Drescher, Olivia ; Bergeron, Linda ; Thomas, Aliki</creatorcontrib><description>Background The widespread implementation of longitudinal assessment (LA) to document trainees’ progression to independent practice rests more on speculative rather than evidence-based benefits. We aimed to document stakeholders’ knowledge of- and attitudes towards LA, and identify how the supports and barriers can help or hinder the uptake and sustainable use of LA. Methods We interviewed representatives from four stakeholder groups involved in LA. The interview protocols were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which contains a total of 14 behaviour change determinants. Two team members coded the interviews deductively to the TDF, with a third resolving differences in coding. The qualitative data analysis was completed with iterative consultations and discussions with team members until consensus was achieved. Saliency analysis was used to identify dominant domains. Results Forty-one individuals participated in the study. Three dominant domains were identified. Participants perceive that LA has more positive than negative consequences and requires substantial ressources. All the elements and characteristics of LA are present in our data, with differences between stakeholders. Conclusion Going forward, we could develop and implement tailored and theory driven interventions to promote a shared understanding of LA, and maintain potential positive outcomes while reducing negative ones. Furthermore, ressources to support LA implementation need to be addressed to facilitate its uptake.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1382-4996</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-1677</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10459-022-10119-5</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35624332</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Behavior ; Behavior Change ; Clinical competence ; Coding ; Data Analysis ; Education ; Evaluation ; Longitudinal Studies ; Medical Education ; Medical students ; Progress Monitoring ; Qualitative Research ; Stakeholders ; Supervisors</subject><ispartof>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2022-08, Vol.27 (3), p.735-759</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022</rights><rights>2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.</rights><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-e33262b03f96ba22d6d4fed534838741899e0c419d861883a65893978f253dda3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-e33262b03f96ba22d6d4fed534838741899e0c419d861883a65893978f253dda3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5313-0456</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2701323064?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21378,21394,27924,27925,33611,33612,33877,33878,43733,43880</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1344804$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35624332$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>St-Onge, Christina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boileau, Elisabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Langevin, Serge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Lily H. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drescher, Olivia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bergeron, Linda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Aliki</creatorcontrib><title>Stakeholders’ perception on the implementation of Developmental Progress Assessment: using the Theoretical Domains Framework to document behavioral determinants</title><title>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice</title><addtitle>Adv in Health Sci Educ</addtitle><addtitle>Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract</addtitle><description>Background The widespread implementation of longitudinal assessment (LA) to document trainees’ progression to independent practice rests more on speculative rather than evidence-based benefits. We aimed to document stakeholders’ knowledge of- and attitudes towards LA, and identify how the supports and barriers can help or hinder the uptake and sustainable use of LA. Methods We interviewed representatives from four stakeholder groups involved in LA. The interview protocols were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which contains a total of 14 behaviour change determinants. Two team members coded the interviews deductively to the TDF, with a third resolving differences in coding. The qualitative data analysis was completed with iterative consultations and discussions with team members until consensus was achieved. Saliency analysis was used to identify dominant domains. Results Forty-one individuals participated in the study. Three dominant domains were identified. Participants perceive that LA has more positive than negative consequences and requires substantial ressources. All the elements and characteristics of LA are present in our data, with differences between stakeholders. Conclusion Going forward, we could develop and implement tailored and theory driven interventions to promote a shared understanding of LA, and maintain potential positive outcomes while reducing negative ones. Furthermore, ressources to support LA implementation need to be addressed to facilitate its uptake.</description><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Behavior Change</subject><subject>Clinical competence</subject><subject>Coding</subject><subject>Data Analysis</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Longitudinal Studies</subject><subject>Medical Education</subject><subject>Medical students</subject><subject>Progress Monitoring</subject><subject>Qualitative Research</subject><subject>Stakeholders</subject><subject>Supervisors</subject><issn>1382-4996</issn><issn>1573-1677</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>CJNVE</sourceid><sourceid>M0P</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctu1TAQhiMEohd4ASSQJTZsAr7HZlf1wkWVQKKsLZ94co7bJE5tp4hdX4Mtj8aT4HNSisQCydJYM98_M_ZfVc8Ifk0wbt4kgrnQNaa0JpgQXYsH1T4RDauJbJqH5c4UrbnWcq86SOkSY8yIUo-rPSYk5YzR_ernl2yvYBN6BzH9uv2BJogtTNmHEZWTN4D8MPUwwJjtku3QCdxAH6ZdrkefY1hHSAkdpVTCNvsWzcmP6538YgMhQvZtQU_CYP2Y0Fm0A3wL8QrlgFxo560IrWBjb3yIBXSQIQ5-tGNOT6pHne0TPL2Lh9XXs9OL4_f1-ad3H46PzuuW6SbXUN4j6QqzTsuVpdRJxztwgnHFVMOJ0hpwy4l2SpZfYFYKpYtSdVQw5yw7rF4tfacYrmdI2Qw-tdD3doQwJ0NlQ2gjhFQFffkPehnmOJbtDG0wYZRhyQtFF6qNIaUInZmiH2z8bgg2WwfN4qApDpqdg0YU0Yu71vNqAHcv-WNZAZ4vAETf3pdPPxLGucLbqWypp1Ib1xD_7vafsb8BQDOzpQ</recordid><startdate>20220801</startdate><enddate>20220801</enddate><creator>St-Onge, Christina</creator><creator>Boileau, Elisabeth</creator><creator>Langevin, Serge</creator><creator>Nguyen, Lily H. P.</creator><creator>Drescher, Olivia</creator><creator>Bergeron, Linda</creator><creator>Thomas, Aliki</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5313-0456</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220801</creationdate><title>Stakeholders’ perception on the implementation of Developmental Progress Assessment: using the Theoretical Domains Framework to document behavioral determinants</title><author>St-Onge, Christina ; Boileau, Elisabeth ; Langevin, Serge ; Nguyen, Lily H. P. ; Drescher, Olivia ; Bergeron, Linda ; Thomas, Aliki</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-e33262b03f96ba22d6d4fed534838741899e0c419d861883a65893978f253dda3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Behavior Change</topic><topic>Clinical competence</topic><topic>Coding</topic><topic>Data Analysis</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Longitudinal Studies</topic><topic>Medical Education</topic><topic>Medical students</topic><topic>Progress Monitoring</topic><topic>Qualitative Research</topic><topic>Stakeholders</topic><topic>Supervisors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>St-Onge, Christina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boileau, Elisabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Langevin, Serge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Lily H. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drescher, Olivia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bergeron, Linda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Aliki</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>St-Onge, Christina</au><au>Boileau, Elisabeth</au><au>Langevin, Serge</au><au>Nguyen, Lily H. P.</au><au>Drescher, Olivia</au><au>Bergeron, Linda</au><au>Thomas, Aliki</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1344804</ericid><atitle>Stakeholders’ perception on the implementation of Developmental Progress Assessment: using the Theoretical Domains Framework to document behavioral determinants</atitle><jtitle>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice</jtitle><stitle>Adv in Health Sci Educ</stitle><addtitle>Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract</addtitle><date>2022-08-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>735</spage><epage>759</epage><pages>735-759</pages><issn>1382-4996</issn><eissn>1573-1677</eissn><abstract>Background The widespread implementation of longitudinal assessment (LA) to document trainees’ progression to independent practice rests more on speculative rather than evidence-based benefits. We aimed to document stakeholders’ knowledge of- and attitudes towards LA, and identify how the supports and barriers can help or hinder the uptake and sustainable use of LA. Methods We interviewed representatives from four stakeholder groups involved in LA. The interview protocols were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which contains a total of 14 behaviour change determinants. Two team members coded the interviews deductively to the TDF, with a third resolving differences in coding. The qualitative data analysis was completed with iterative consultations and discussions with team members until consensus was achieved. Saliency analysis was used to identify dominant domains. Results Forty-one individuals participated in the study. Three dominant domains were identified. Participants perceive that LA has more positive than negative consequences and requires substantial ressources. All the elements and characteristics of LA are present in our data, with differences between stakeholders. Conclusion Going forward, we could develop and implement tailored and theory driven interventions to promote a shared understanding of LA, and maintain potential positive outcomes while reducing negative ones. Furthermore, ressources to support LA implementation need to be addressed to facilitate its uptake.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><pmid>35624332</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10459-022-10119-5</doi><tpages>25</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5313-0456</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1382-4996
ispartof Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2022-08, Vol.27 (3), p.735-759
issn 1382-4996
1573-1677
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2671275568
source Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); Springer Nature; Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); ERIC
subjects Behavior
Behavior Change
Clinical competence
Coding
Data Analysis
Education
Evaluation
Longitudinal Studies
Medical Education
Medical students
Progress Monitoring
Qualitative Research
Stakeholders
Supervisors
title Stakeholders’ perception on the implementation of Developmental Progress Assessment: using the Theoretical Domains Framework to document behavioral determinants
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T10%3A49%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Stakeholders%E2%80%99%20perception%20on%20the%20implementation%20of%20Developmental%20Progress%20Assessment:%20using%20the%20Theoretical%20Domains%20Framework%20to%20document%20behavioral%20determinants&rft.jtitle=Advances%20in%20health%20sciences%20education%20:%20theory%20and%20practice&rft.au=St-Onge,%20Christina&rft.date=2022-08-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=735&rft.epage=759&rft.pages=735-759&rft.issn=1382-4996&rft.eissn=1573-1677&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10459-022-10119-5&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2701323064%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c397t-e33262b03f96ba22d6d4fed534838741899e0c419d861883a65893978f253dda3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2701323064&rft_id=info:pmid/35624332&rft_ericid=EJ1344804&rfr_iscdi=true