National Society of Genetic Counselors' Board of Directors response to Myers et al. ‘A report of the AGCPD task force to evaluate associations between select admissions requirements, demographics, and performance on ABGC certification examination’

Zierhut, Heather; Jamal, Leila; Riordan, Sara; Wilson, Patrick L.; Carey, Meghan E; Babu, Deepti

doi:10.1002/jgc4.1569

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To expand the use of simulation in genetic counseling, more work must be done to increase the quality and evidence base (Lewis et al., 2017; Shepherd & Burton, 2019; Zierhut et al., 2022), especially if it is to be incorporated into the certification process. GC programs could collaborate in sharing cases and resources, building on the cases that were shared when the COVID‐19 pandemic began.…”

Section: Call To Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond multiple choice: Clinical simulation as a rigorous and inclusive method for assessing genetic counseling competencies

Cho,

Davis,

Lowe

et al. 2024

Journal of Genetic Counseling

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Educational use of clinical simulation is a way for students to immerse themselves within a realistic yet safe and structured environment as they practice clinical skills. It is widely used in healthcare training and evaluation, and there are best practices for design, implementation, debriefing, and assessment. An increasing number of genetic counseling graduate programs use simulation in various ways, ranging from role‐plays to working with professional simulated/standardized patient (SP) actors. At this time, there is very little consistency across programs, research on the approaches, and standards by which simulation is incorporated into training. Simulation is an understudied but promising approach for genetic counselor (GC) education and assessment. After graduation, GCs demonstrate their competence as entry‐level providers through American Board of Genetic Counseling (ABGC) multiple‐choice examination (MCE), along with their participatory clinical encounters from graduate training. Data from genetic counseling and other professions highlight the limitations and biases of MCEs, suggesting they not only fail to accurately capture competency, but also that they disadvantage underrepresented individuals from entering the field. In addition, MCEs are limited as a tool for assessing nuanced counseling and communication skills, as compared to more quantitative scientific knowledge. We propose that innovative, evidence‐based approaches such as simulation have the potential to not only enhance learning, but also to allow GCs to better demonstrate competency during training and in relation to the board examination. Collaborative approaches, research, and funding are needed to further explore the viability of routinely incorporating simulation into GC training and assessment.

show abstract

Section: Call To Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%