Enhancing Professionalism Online (Netiquette) in Medical Schools: A Systematic Scoping Review

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background The relaxing of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions has not seen the return to previous in-person teaching formats. As blended training continues to be used, there is emphasis on the need to better appreciate the expectations, etiquette, and professional code of conduct (“netiquette”) surrounding online learning, especially in light of evidence that poor online professionalism compromises learning and clinical practice. Objectives This review seeks to map regnant netiquette guidelines in medical schools that will inform and provide preliminary recommendations for a clinically relevant framework. Design This study is a systematic scoping review (SSR). Methods Krishna's Systematic Evidence-Based Approach (SEBA)'s Constructivist ontological and Relativist epistemological lens was used to guide this SSR. The SEBA process involves 6 stages, including the Systematic Approach, Split Approach, Jigsaw Perspective, Funneling, Analysis of evidence-based and non-data-driven literature, and Synthesis of the SSR in SEBA. Results In total, 7941 abstracts were reviewed, 198 full text articles were evaluated, and 83 articles were included. The analysis of the results revealed 4 key domains: (1) current guidelines, (2) manifestations, (3) contributing factors, and (4) implications. This SSR in SEBA highlights variability and gaps in current guidelines and reveals the impact of sociocultural factors on breaches in netiquette. Unsurprisingly, contextual and clinical considerations shape the contributory factors impacting lapses in netiquette and their implications. Conclusions Based on the data accrued, this article proposes basic guidelines on netiquette and measures to support their effective employment. This includes curricular adaptations, methods of teaching and enhancing engagement with the students and faculty training. Drawing on prevailing studies, it also recommends methods of assessing netiquette, online professionalism, and the learning environment. Suggestions are also made for future areas of study.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.