Document Type : Original Article
Authors
- . Soleiman Ahmady
- . Shahram Yazdani
- . Fakhrolsadat Hosseini
- . Mohammad Mehdi Forouzanfar 1
- . Ali Tabibi 2
- . Fatemeh Ahmadinia 3
- . Hoda Ahmari Tehran 3
- . Noushin Kohan 4
- . Heidar Mohammadi 5
1 Department of Emergency Medicine, Shohadaye Tajrish Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
2 Department of Urology, School of Medicine,Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences
3 Department of Medical Education, Tehran University of Medical Sciences
4 Department of Medical Education Virual University of Medical Sciences
5 Department of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is essential to adjust the responsibilities and function of medical education offices (MEOs)
in regard to the current societal requirements. Therefore, it is a good idea to learn lessons from the
experiences about the establishment and function of these offices around the world. The aim of the
present study was to carry out a comparative study to investigate the function and structure of MEOs
at some of the medical universities from America, Europe, and Asia.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This is a comparative, descriptive study that was conducted in 2015.
Eleven offices around the world (in America, Europe, and Asia) were selected for the study. Expert
group discussion and literature review were used in order to select research sample. The data were
gathered using self‑constructed checklists. Content and face validity of the checklist was assessed
by gathering feedback from experts. The Kappa coefficient was used to determine the inter‑rater
reliability.
RESULTS: All the 11 offices in our study (100%) dealt with the issues of faculty development and
research and scholarship activities. Only one out of the 11 offices (27%) dealt with the issues of
society and patient education. Five out of the 11 offices (36%) dealt with the continuing medical
education and continuing professional development. Consultation services are provided at seven
of the 11 offices (64%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed both commonalities and differences in the function and structure
of MEO among the 11 offices we examined. Based on this study, effective goals and strategies for
MEO can be recommended.
Keywords
education: Nigeria. Med Educ 2007;41:507.
2. Albanese MA, Dottl S, Nowacek GA. Offices of research in medical
education: Accomplishments and added value contributions.
Teach Learn Med 2001;13:258‑67.
3. Davis MH, Karunathilake I, Harden RM. AMEE education guide
no 28: The development and role of departments of medical
education. Med Teach 2005;27:665‑75.
4. Al‑Wardy NM. Medical education units: History, functions, and
organisation. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J 2008;8:149‑56.
5. Brown S. The institute for learning and teaching and UK
approaches to accrediting teaching: Looking to the future. Med
Teach 2000;22:513‑6.
6. Al Shawwa LA. The establishment and roles of the medical
education department in the faculty of medicine, King Abdul
Aziz university, Jeddah Saudi Arabia. Oman Med J 2012;27:4‑9.
7. Gruppen L. Creating and sustaining centres for medical educationresearch and development. Med Educ 2008; 42:121‑3.
8. DeZure D, Van Note Chism N, Deane Sorcinelli M,
Cheong G, Ellozy AR, Holley M, et al. Building international
faculty‑development collaborations: The evolving role of
American teaching centers. Change Mag High Learn 2012;44:24‑33.
9. Adkoli BV, Sood R. Faculty development and medical education
units in India: A survey. Natl Med J India 2009; 22:28‑32.
10. Torabian S, Shoghi Shafagh Aria F, Vosough Moghadam A,
Esteghamati A. First report on structure and function of
educational research & development offices in iranian medical
universities. Iran J Med Educ 2002;2:56. [In Persian]
11. Yadegarynia D, Zarein‑Dolab S, Arulanantham S. The educational
development office: working for change, working with change.
Medical Education 2001; 1:1‑7.
12. Momtazmanesh N, Shoghi Shafagh Aria F. Educational
development offices (EDCS) in universities of medical sciences:
Treatment and medical education, roles, position and achievement.
Teb Tazkiyeh 2010; 76:59‑64. [In Persian]
13. Mirzazadeh A, Gandomkar R, Shahsavari H, Shariat Moharari R,
Niknafs N, Shirazi M, et al. Applying accreditation standards
in a self‑evaluation process: The experience of educational
development officeoffice of Tehran university of medical sciences.
J Med Educ Dev 2016;10:340‑51. [In Persian]
14. Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement:
The kappa statistic. Fam Med 2005; 37:360‑3.
15. Changiz T, Yamani N. exploring the faculty members’
expectations from educational development centers in medical
universities: A qualitative research. Iran J Med Educ 2013;
12:947‑64. [In Persian]
16. Jalili M, Mirzazadeh A, Jafarian, A. The concept of scholarship:
Educational scholarship and its application in Iran. Iran J Med
Educ 2009; 9:167‑80. [In Persian]
17. Araghian Mojarad F, Sanglo A, Jooybari, L. Teaching scholarship:
An opportunity for faculty development or a threat. Iran J Med
Educ 2015; 15:626‑7. [In Persian]
18. Momtazmanesh N, Entezari A, Jalili Z, Mohagheghi MA.
Challenges of community oriented medical education in Iran.
Teb Tazkiyeh J 2010;77:52‑64. [In Persian]
19. Yamani N, Fakhari M. Social accountability of medical education
curriculum: Barriers and implications. Iran J Med Educ
2014;13:1082‑98. [In Persian]
20. Akbari S, Ahmady S, Hoseini M. Exploring faculty members’
perceptions about socially accountable medical education
challenges: A qualitative content analysis. Strides Dev Med Educ
2016;13:1‑9. [In Persian]
21. Dehghani MR, Azizi F, Haghdoost A, Nakhaee N, Khazaeli P,
Ravangard Z. Situation analysis of social accountability medical
education in university of medical sciences and innovative
point of view of clinical faculty members towards its promotion
using strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT)
analysis model. Strides Dev Med Educ 2014;10:403‑12. [In Persian]
22. Nourian AA, Mousavinasab N, Vahhabi M. Attitudes of medical
students and teachers towards education in community‑oriented
medical education (COME) centre, Zanjan university of medical
sciences. Strides Dev Med Educ 2006;3:43‑50. [In Persian]
23. Torabian S, Mogadam AV, Syahk MS. Evaluation of some aspects
of educational inputs and outputs of community medicine
departments in Iran medical sciences schools and universities.
Strides Dev Med Educ 2007;3:95‑10. [In Persian]
)