Background Design thinking is a problem-solving framework that has been used to enhance patient experiences, improve clinical outcomes, and refine medical curricula. This study reviewed the use of design thinking in health professions education. Methods A search yielded 169 articles, which were excluded if they were: (1) not related to education; (2) lacking an application of design thinking; or (3) not associated with healthcare. The final review yielded 15 articles, which were analyzed using qualitative methods. Results All articles were published in 2009 or later and were diverse in their context, participants, and approach. Six studies emphasized the early stages of design thinking, with inspiration and ideation stages fostered through a variety of activities, such as lectures, small group discussions, and workshops. Studies examined a range of outcomes, including self-efficacy, perceptions, and solutions to a specific problem. Conclusions Our findings raise important considerations for health professions education, including the extent to which we should: 1) teach design thinking to students as a skill-based tool to prepare students for problem solving in complex healthcare environments; and 2) use design thinking to create, implement, and refine health professions curricula and educational programs. Despite the apparent benefits of design thinking, many questions for health professions education remain. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-019-1528-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Introduction Growth mindset is a motivation theory proposed by Carol Dweck that posits our beliefs about intelligence, and the ability to change mindsets can have impacts on how we approach challenges, respond to criticism challenges and orient our goals. This study characterised articles on growth mindset theory in health professions education to: summarise the aspects of growth mindset being researched, describe the discussed benefits of growth mindset theory and outline strategies discussed that may promote a growth mindset. Methods A systematic review of the literature yielded 4927 articles—articles were reviewed and excluded if they were outside of health professions education and did not discuss Dweck's growth mindset theory. The final review yielded 14 research articles and 13 commentaries, which were characterised and analysed using content analysis. Results The included articles were published in 2016 and beyond; the articles represented a diverse context, participant type and approach. Most research studies measured participant mindsets and evaluated the correlation with other variables (eg grit, well‐being, anxiety). Articles often highlighted benefits and strategies to promote a growth mindset at the learner, educator and organisation level. The most common learner benefits were to help them be more receptive to feedback as well as increased resiliency and perseverance, educator benefits focused on supporting collaborative relationships and safe learning environments. The most prevalent strategies discussed were teaching learners about growth mindset theory, shifting faculty feedback to emphasise effort and to prioritise feedback across the organisation. Conclusion The growth mindset framework has been shown in other fields to help others manage educational challenges and enhance learning environments. Researchers are encouraged to explore how interventions such as teaching about and prioritising a growth mindset can support learners, health care professionals, educators and organisations.

Purpose The entrustable professional activity (EPA) framework is an assessment approach used to define the educational outcomes of a program by outlining discrete work tasks learners are expected to perform independently upon graduation. This study outlines the development and evaluation of an EPA framework for predoctoral dental education at the University of North Carolina Adams School of Dentistry. Methods The draft EPA framework was created in collaboration with a group of faculty members and included 15 statements that were mapped to relevant Commission on Dental Accreditation standards. The draft EPA framework was distributed to faculty via an electronic survey, requesting participants to evaluate whether the EPAs were well‐defined; observable; measurable; expected of a general dentist; transferable to other practice settings; and required application of relevant knowledge, skills, and attitudes. In addition, participants were asked to identify the percentage of graduates who could perform these tasks independently and whether learners must be able to perform the list of EPAs upon graduation. Results Sixty‐eight faculty members completed the survey (72% response rate); participants represented all divisions across the school and had extensive dental practice experiences. Overall, participants agreed the EPAs met the defined criteria and were considered important for graduates to be able to demonstrate. Feedback from faculty voiced support for the EPA framework and identified concerns regarding the implementation due to potential faculty calibration and time constraints. Conclusion Evidence from this study supports additional research to explore how the EPA framework can be further developed in predoctoral and postgraduate dental education programs.