Article Text
Abstract
Background A leadership development programme (The Health Leadership School) was launched in 2018 for junior doctors and medical students in Norway.
Objective To study participants’ experiences and self-assessed learning outcomes, and if there were any differences in outcome among participants who met face-to-face versus and those who had to complete half of the programme in a virtual classroom due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods Participants who completed The Health Leadership School in 2018–2020 were invited to respond to a web-based questionnaire.
Results A total of 33 (83%) out of 40 participants responded. The majority of respondents (97%) somewhat agreed or strongly agreed that they had gained knowledge and skills they did not learn in medical school. Respondents reported a high learning outcome for most competency domains, and there was no difference in outcome when comparing scores of those who met face-to-face versus and those who had to complete half of the programme in a virtual classroom. Among participants who participated in virtual classroom sessions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority agreed that the programme could be run as a combination of face-to-face and virtual sessions.
Conclusion This brief report suggests that leadership development programmes for junior doctors and medical students can be run in-part using virtual classroom sessions, but that face-to-face sessions are important to foster relational and teamwork skills.
- medical leadership
- medical student
- doctor
- improvement
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Twitter @DrFrich
Contributors JF designed the study, analysed and interpreted the data and drafted the manuscript. CB, HR, MLF, CM and OMK contributed to the design of the study, interpreted the data and revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content. All authors approved the final version to be published.
Funding The Health Leadership School is funded by Norwegian Medical Association.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.