The DoCTRINE Guidelines: Defined Criteria To Report INnovations in Education. (27th April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Blanco, Maria; Prunuske, Jacob; DiCorcia, Mark; Learman, Lee A.; Mutcheson, Brock; Huang, Grace C.
• Is Part Of: Academic medicine. Volume 97:Number 5(2022)
• Page Start: 689
• Page End: 695
• Publication Date: 2022-04-27
• Subjects: Medical education -- Periodicals; Medical policy -- Periodicals; Medical personnel -- Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.711
• DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000004634
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1040-2446

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: Reporting guidelines assist authors in conducting and describing their research in alignment with evidence-based and expert-determined standards. However, published research-oriented guidelines do not capture all of the components that must be present in descriptions of educational innovations in health professions education. The authors aimed to create guidelines for educational innovations in curriculum development that would be easy for early-career educators to use, support reporting necessary details, and promote educational scholarship. Method: Beginning in 2017, the authors systematically developed a reporting checklist for educational innovations in curriculum development, called Defined Criteria To Report INnovations in Education (DoCTRINE), and collected validity evidence for its use according to the 4 inferences of Kane's framework. They derived the items using a modified Delphi method, followed by pilot testing, cognitive interviewing, and interrater reliability testing. In May–November 2019, they implemented DoCTRINE for authors submitting to MedEdPORTAL, half of whom were randomized to receive the checklist (intervention group). The authors scored manuscripts using DoCTRINE while blinded to group assignment, and they collected data on final editorial decisions. Results: The final DoCTRINE checklist consists of 19 items, categorized into 5 components: introduction, curriculum development, curriculum implementation, results, and discussion. The overall interrater agreement was 0.91. Among the 108 manuscripts submitted to MedEdPORTAL during the study period, the mean (SD) total score was higher for accepted than rejected submissions (16.9 [1.73] vs 15.7 [2.24], P = .006). There were no significant differences in DoCTRINE scores between the intervention group, who received the checklist, and the control group, who did not. Conclusions: The authors developed DoCTRINE, using systematic approaches, for the scholarly reporting of educational innovations in curriculum development. This checklist may be a useful tool for supporting the publishing efforts of early-career faculty.