CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 89Innovations in Medical EducationGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical ResearchHealth and Medical Research Impacts

Preparing Medical Specialists for Genomic Medicine: Continuing Education Should Include Opportunities for Experiential Learning

Open access
McClaren, Belinda J., Crellin, Erin, Janinski, Monika, Nisselle, Amy E., Ng, Larissa, Metcalfe, Sylvia A., Gaff, Clara L.·2020·Frontiers in Genetics
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2020.00151PMC PMC7063730
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

With the demand for genomic investigations increasing, medical specialists will need to, and are beginning to, practice genomic medicine. The need for medical specialists from diverse specialties to be ready to appropriately practice genomic medicine is widely recognised, but existing studies focus on single specialties or clinical settings. We explored continuing education needs in genomic medicine of a wide range of medical specialists (excluding genetic specialists) from across Australia. Interviews were conducted with 86 medical specialists in Australia from diverse medical specialties. Inductive content analysis categorized participants by career stage and genomics experience. Themes related to education needs were identified through constant comparison and discussion between authors of emerging concepts. Our findings show that participants believe that experiential learning in genomic medicine is necessary to develop the confidence and skills needed for clinical care. The main themes reported are: tailoring of education to the specialty and the individual; peer interactions contextualizes knowledge; experience will aid in developing confidence and skills. In fact, avenues of gaining experience may result in increased engagement with continuing education in genomic medicine as specialists are exposed to relevant applications in their clinical practice. Participants affirmed the need for continuing education in genomic medicine but identified that it would need to be tailored to the specialty and the individual: one size does not fit all, so a multifaceted approached is needed. Participants infrequently attended formal continuing education in genomic medicine. More commonly, they reported experiential learning by observation, case-review or interacting with a "genomics champion" in their specialty, which contextualized their knowledge. Medical specialists anticipate that genomic medicine will become part of their practice which could lessen demand on the specialist genetic workforce. They expect to look to experts within their own medical specialty who have gained genomics expertise for specific and contextualized support as they develop the skills and confidence to practice genomic medicine. These findings highlight the need to include opportunities for experiential learning in continuing education. Concepts identified in these interviews can be tested with a larger sample of medical specialists to ascertain representativeness.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fgene.2020.00151

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 41

  1. Bowdin S. Gilbert A. Bedoukian E. Carew C. Adam M. P. Belmont J. (2016). Recommendations for the integration of genomics into clinical practice. Genet. Med. 18, 1075– 1084. 10.1038/gim.2016.17 27171546 PMC5557020 · DOI
  2. Burke S. Stone A. Bedward J. Thomas H. Farndon P. (2006). A “neglected part of the curriculum” or “of limited use”? views on genetics training by nongenetics medical trainees and implications for delivery. Genet. Med. 8, 109– 115. 10.1097/01.gim.0000200159.19920.b5 16481894 · DOI
  3. Burton H. Hall A. Kroese M. Raza S. (2017). Genomics in mainstream clinical pathways (Cambridge, UK: PHG Foundation).
  4. Burton H. (2011). “ Genetics and mainstream medicine”. (Cambridge, UK: PHG Foundation).
  5. Carroll J. C. Rideout A. L. Wilson B. J. Allanson J. M. Blaine S. M. Esplen M. J. (2009). Genetic education for primary care providers: improving attitudes, knowledge, and confidence. Can. Fam. Physician 55, e92– e99. 20008584 PMC2793208
  6. Chow-White P. Ha D. Laskin J. (2017). Knowledge, attitudes, and values among physicians working with clinical genomics: a survey of medical oncologists. Hum. Resour. Health 15, 1– 9. 10.1186/s12960-017-0218-z 28655303 PMC5488429 · DOI
  7. Christensen K. D. Vassy J. L. Jamal L. Lehmann L. S. Slashinski M. J. Perry D. L. (2016). Are physicians prepared for whole genome sequencing? a qualitative analysis. Clin. Genet. 89, 228– 234. 10.1111/cge.12626 26080898 PMC4683111 · DOI
  8. Collins F. S. McKusick V. A. (2001). Implications of the human genome project for medical science. JAMA 285, 540– 544. 10.1001/jama.285.5.540 11176855 · DOI
  9. Crellin E. McClaren B. Nisselle A. Best S. Gaff C. Metcalfe S. (2019). Preparing medical specialists to practice genomic medicine: education an essential part of a broader strategy. Front. Genet. 10, 789. 10.3389/fgene.2019.00789 31572433 PMC6749815 · DOI
  10. Creswell J. W. Plano Clark V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (Great Britian: SAGE Publications, Inc.).
  11. Gaff C. L. Aitken M. Flouris A. Metcalfe S. A. (2007). A model for the development of genetics education programs for health professionals. Genet. Med. 9, 451– 457. 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3180a6eb69 17666891 · DOI
  12. Gaff C. L. Winship I. M. Forrest S. M. Hansen D. P. Clark J. Waring P. M. (2017). Preparing for genomic medicine: a real world demonstration of health system change. NPJ Genomic Med. 2, 1– 9. 10.1038/s41525-017-0017-4 PMC5677913 29263830 · DOI
  13. Ginsburg G. (2014). Medical genomics: gather and use genetic data in health care. Nature 508, 451– 453. 10.1038/508451a 24765668 · DOI
  14. Grant J. (2002). Learning needs assessment: assessing the need. BMJ 324, 156– 159. 10.1136/bmj.324.7330.156 11799035 PMC64520 · DOI
  15. Houwink E. J. Luijk S. J. Henneman L. Vleuten C. Dinant G. J. Cornel M. C. (2011). Genetic educational needs and the role of genetics in primary care: a focus group study with multiple perspectives. BMC Fam. Pract. 12, 1– 9. 10.1186/1471-2296-12-5 21329524 PMC3053218 · DOI
  16. Houwink E. J. van Teeffelen S. R. Muijtjens A. M. Henneman L. Jacobi F. van Luijk S. J. (2014). Sustained effects of online genetics education: a randomized controlled trial on oncogenetics. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 22, 310– 316. 10.1038/ejhg.2013.163 23942200 PMC3925286 · DOI
  17. Hsieh H. F. Shannon S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual. Health Res. 15, 1277– 1288. 10.1177/1049732305276687 16204405 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Johnson L. M. Valdez J. M. Quinn E. A. Sykes A. D. McGee R. B. Nuccio R. (2017). Integrating next-generation sequencing into pediatric oncology practice: an assessment of physician confidence and understanding of clinical genomics. Cancer 123, 2352– 2359. 10.1002/cncr.30581 28192596 PMC5710798 · DOI
  19. Knowles M. Elwood H. Swanson R. (2015). The adult learner (New York: Taylor & Francis Ltd.).
  20. Long J. C. Pomare C. Best S. Boughtwood T. North K. Ellis L. A. (2019). Building a learning community of Australian clinical genomics: a social network study of the australian genomic health alliance. BMC Med. 17, 44. 10.1186/s12916-019-1274-0 30791916 PMC6385428 · DOI
  21. Manolio T. A. Chisholm R. L. Ozenberger B. Roden D. M. Williams M. S. Wilson R. (2013). Implementing genomic medicine in the clinic: the future is here. Genet. Med. 15, 258– 267. 10.1038/gim.2012.157 23306799 PMC3835144 · DOI
  22. McClaren B. King E. Crellin E. Gaff C. Metcalfe S. Nisselle A. (2020). Development of an evidence-based, theory-informed national survey of physician preparedness for genomic medicine and preferences for genomics continueing education. Front. Genet. 11, 1– 17. 10.3389/fgene.2020.00059 32194615 PMC7063665 · DOI
  23. McGrath S. Ghersi D. (2016). Building towards precision medicine: empowering medical professionals for the next revolution. BMC Med. Genomics 9, 1– 6. 10.1186/s12920-016-0183-8 27160306 PMC4862053 · DOI
  24. Metcalfe S. A. Aitken M. Gaff C. L. (2008). The importance of program evaluation: how can it be applied to diverse genetics education settings? J. Genet. Couns. 17, 170– 179. 10.1007/s10897-007-9138-8 18247108 · DOI
  25. Nisselle A. Macciocca I. McKenzie F. Vuong H. Dunlop K. McClaren B. (2019a). Readiness of clinical genetic healthcare professionals to provide genomic medicine: an Australian census. J. Genet. Couns. 28, 367– 377. 10.1002/jgc4.1101 30779404 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Nisselle A. Martyn M. Jordan H. Kaunein N. McEwen A. Patel C. (2019b). Ensuring best practice in genomic education and evaluation: a program logic approach. Front. Genet. 10, 1057. 10.3389/fgene.2019.01057 31781158 PMC6857516 · DOI
  27. Passamani E. (2013). Educational challenges in implementing genomic medicine. Clin. Pharmocol. Ther. 94, 192– 195. 10.1038/clpt.2013.38 23872834 · DOI
  28. Patton M. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (USA: SAGE Publication Inc.).
  29. Paul J. L. Leslie H. Trainer A. H. Gaff C. (2018). A theory-informed systematic review of clinicians’ genetic testing practices. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 26, 1401– 1416. 10.1038/s41431-018-0190-7 29891880 PMC6138746 · DOI
  30. Peters M. Ten Cate O. (2014). Bedside teaching in medical education: a literature review. Perspect. Med. Educ. 3, 76– 88. 10.1007/s40037-013-0083-y 24049043 PMC3976479 · DOI
  31. Reed E. K. Taber K. A. J. Nissen T. I. Schott S. Dowling L. O. O’Leary J. C. (2016). What works in genomics education: outcomes of an evidenced-based instructional model for community-based physicians. Genet. In Med. 18, 737– 745. 10.1038/gim.2015.144 26583682 · DOI
  32. Satcher R. L. Bogler O. Hyle L. Lee A. Simmons A. Williams R. (2014). Telemedicine and telesurgery in cancer care: inaugural conference at MD anderson cancer center. J. Surg. Oncol. 110, 353– 359. 10.1002/jso.23652 24889208 · DOI
  33. Stanek E. J. Sanders C. L. Taber K. A. Khalid M. Patel A. Verbrugge R. R. (2012). Adoption of pharmacogenomic testing by US physicians: results of a nationwide survey. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 91, 450– 458. 10.1038/clpt.2011.306 22278335 · DOI
  34. Stark Z. Boughtwood T. Phillips P. Christodoulou J. Hansen D. P. Braithwaite J. (2019a). Australian Genomics: a federated model for integrating genomics into healthcare. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 105, 7– 14. 10.1016/j.ajhg.2019.06.003 31271757 PMC6612707 · DOI
  35. Talwar D. Tseng T. S. Foster M. Xu L. Chen L. S. (2017). Genetics/genomics education for nongenetic health professionals: a systematic literature review. Genet. Med. 19, 725– 732. 10.1038/gim.2016.156 27763635 · DOI
  36. Turnbull C. Scott R. H. Thomas E. Jones L. Murugaesu N. Pretty F. B. (2018). The 100 000 genomes project: bringing whole genome sequencing to the NHS. BMJ 361, 1– 7. 10.1136/bmj.k1687 29691228 · DOI
  37. Vaismoradi M. Turunen H. Bondas T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs. Health Sci. 15, 398– 405. 10.1111/nhs.12048 23480423 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Vassy J. L. Korf B. R. Green R. C. (2015). How to know when physicians are ready for genomic medicine. Sci. Trans. Med. 7, 287fs219– 287fs219. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaa2401 PMC4519005 25971999 · DOI
  39. Weipert C. M. Ryan K. A. Everett J. N. Yashar B. M. Chinnaiyan A. M. Scott Roberts J. (2018). Physician experiences and understanding of genomic sequencing in oncology. J. Genet. Couns. 27, 187– 196. 10.1007/s10897-017-0134-3 28840409 PMC5810555 · DOI
  40. Williams M. S. (2019). Early lessons from the implementation of genomic medicine programs. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 20, 389– 411. 10.1146/annurev-genom-083118-014924 30811224 · DOI
  41. Zebrowski A. M. Ellis D. E. Barg F. K. Sperber N. R. Bernhardt B. A. Denny J. C. (2019). Qualitative study of system-level factors related to genomic implementation. Genet. Med. 21, 1534– 1540. 10.1038/s41436-018-0378-9 30467402 PMC6533158 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McClaren, B. J., Crellin, E., Janinski, M., Nisselle, A. E., Ng, L., Metcalfe, S. A., & Gaff, C. L.
Affiliations
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
McClaren, Belinda J.
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Genetics
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2020-03-03
Volume
11
Pages
151-151
ISSN
1664-8021 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fgene.2020.00151
PMC
PMC7063730
OpenAlex
W3010593727
Cited by
89
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 8
FWCI
9.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Genetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Research Impacts
Keywords
genomic medicine, continuing medical education, experiential learning, specialist physicians, educational needs, clinical confidence, specialist workforce, tailored education, peer learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review