What is the role of global health and sustainable development in Swedish medical education? A qualitative study of key stakeholders' perspectives.
Curriculum development
Global health
Interviews
Medical education
Qualitative research
Sustainable development
Sustainable development goals
Sweden
UN 2030 Agenda
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Jul 2023
17 Jul 2023
Historique:
received:
20
02
2023
accepted:
07
07
2023
medline:
19
7
2023
pubmed:
18
7
2023
entrez:
17
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Global health and sustainable development have increasingly been recognised as important parts of medical education, yet education on these issues remains fragmented and scarce. In 2020, a bill to reform the national medical curricula across all Swedish medical schools was introduced, including a greater emphasis on global health and sustainable development. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of key stakeholders in medical education on the role of global health and sustainable development in Swedish medical education. This was a qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews with 11 key stakeholders in medical education, broadly defined as faculty board members (dean and/or vice-deans for medical education) and/or programme chairs representing six universities. Data were analysed using qualitative content analyis (QCA). The study was conducted according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines. Stakeholders discussed the challenges and opportunities associated with the modification of medical education, which was seen as necessary modernisation to fit the changing societal perception of the role of medical doctors. The anchoring process of redesigning the curriculum and integrating global health and sustainable development was discussed, with emphasis on ownership and mandate and the role of teachers and students in the process. Finding a shared understanding of global health and sustainable development was perceived as a challenge, associated with resistance due to fear of curriculum overload. To overcome this, integrating global health and sustainable development with other topics and developing existing components of the curricula were seen as important. Additionally, it was stressed that fostering capacity building and developing infrastructure, including utilization of digital tools and collaborations, were essential to ensure successful implementation. Medical institutions should prepare future doctors to respond to the needs of a globalised world, which include knowledge of global health and sustainable development. However, conceptual uncertainties and questions about ownership remain among key stakeholders in medical education. Yet, key stakeholders also highlight that the inclusion of global health and sustainable development in the new curricula represents multiple overarching educational opportunities that can bring about necessary improvement.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Global health and sustainable development have increasingly been recognised as important parts of medical education, yet education on these issues remains fragmented and scarce. In 2020, a bill to reform the national medical curricula across all Swedish medical schools was introduced, including a greater emphasis on global health and sustainable development. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of key stakeholders in medical education on the role of global health and sustainable development in Swedish medical education.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews with 11 key stakeholders in medical education, broadly defined as faculty board members (dean and/or vice-deans for medical education) and/or programme chairs representing six universities. Data were analysed using qualitative content analyis (QCA). The study was conducted according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Stakeholders discussed the challenges and opportunities associated with the modification of medical education, which was seen as necessary modernisation to fit the changing societal perception of the role of medical doctors. The anchoring process of redesigning the curriculum and integrating global health and sustainable development was discussed, with emphasis on ownership and mandate and the role of teachers and students in the process. Finding a shared understanding of global health and sustainable development was perceived as a challenge, associated with resistance due to fear of curriculum overload. To overcome this, integrating global health and sustainable development with other topics and developing existing components of the curricula were seen as important. Additionally, it was stressed that fostering capacity building and developing infrastructure, including utilization of digital tools and collaborations, were essential to ensure successful implementation.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Medical institutions should prepare future doctors to respond to the needs of a globalised world, which include knowledge of global health and sustainable development. However, conceptual uncertainties and questions about ownership remain among key stakeholders in medical education. Yet, key stakeholders also highlight that the inclusion of global health and sustainable development in the new curricula represents multiple overarching educational opportunities that can bring about necessary improvement.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37460947
doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04502-y
pii: 10.1186/s12909-023-04502-y
pmc: PMC10353143
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
511Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
BMJ Open. 2019 Apr 3;9(4):e026020
pubmed: 30948593
Med Teach. 2011;33(7):551-4
pubmed: 21696281
Perspect Med Educ. 2020 Feb;9(1):60-65
pubmed: 31823304
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Dec;5(12):
pubmed: 33272937
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Oct;5(10):
pubmed: 33109635
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Nov 25;16(1):304
pubmed: 27884194
Qual Res. 2022 Jun;22(3):387-402
pubmed: 35663097
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
Public Health Res Pract. 2022 Jun 15;32(2):
pubmed: 35702751
Acad Med. 2021 Jun 1;96(6):795-797
pubmed: 33394665
Scand J Public Health. 2015 Nov;43(7):687-93
pubmed: 26142351
BMC Med Educ. 2010 Oct 08;10:66
pubmed: 20932277
Lancet. 2009 Jun 6;373(9679):1993-5
pubmed: 19493564
Acad Med. 2007 Mar;82(3):226-30
pubmed: 17327707
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Oct 18;4(5):e002068
pubmed: 31750005
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 May;5(5):
pubmed: 32381653
Global Health. 2020 May 6;16(1):42
pubmed: 32375801
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 May;5(5):
pubmed: 32381655
BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Apr;6(4):
pubmed: 33811100
Glob Health Action. 2014 Aug 27;7:24526
pubmed: 25172428
Nurse Educ Today. 2004 Feb;24(2):105-12
pubmed: 14769454
Acad Med. 2016 May;91(5):628-32
pubmed: 26703416
Lancet. 2008 Nov 8;372(9650):1661-9
pubmed: 18994664
Global Health. 2012 Nov 13;8:35
pubmed: 23148763
BMC Med Educ. 2021 Jun 24;21(1):355
pubmed: 34167532
Ann Glob Health. 2021 Mar 24;87(1):29
pubmed: 33816134