What is the state of complexity science in medical education research?

Context: 'Complexity' is fast becoming a 'god term' in medical education, but little is known about how scholars in the field apply complexity science to the exploration of education phenomena. Complexity science presents both opportunities and challenges to those wishing to adopt its approaches in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Medical Education Vol. 53; no. 1; pp. 95 - 105
Autores principales: Cristancho, Sayra, Field, Emily, Lingard, Lorelei
Formato: tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Jan2019
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=133559333&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 133559333
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        03080110
        ESF
      jtl: Medical Education
      issn: 03080110
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jan2019
      vid: 53
      iid: 1
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
      place: Malden, Massachusetts
    artinfo:
      ui:
        133559333
        133559333
        133559333
        10.1111/medu.13651
        133559333
      ppf: 95
      ppct: 10
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
      tig:
        atl: What is the state of complexity science in medical education research?
      aug:
        au:
          Cristancho, Sayra
          Field, Emily
          Lingard, Lorelei
        affil: Centre for Education Research and Innovation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Western Ontario, London Ontario, Canada
      sug:
        subj:
          Education, Medical
          Education Research
          Serial Publications
          Metaphor
      ab: Context: 'Complexity' is fast becoming a 'god term' in medical education, but little is known about how scholars in the field apply complexity science to the exploration of education phenomena. Complexity science presents both opportunities and challenges to those wishing to adopt its approaches in their research, and debates about its application in the field have emerged. However, these debates have tended towards a reductive characterisation of complexity versus simplicity. We argue that a more productive discussion centres on the multiplicity of complexity orientations, with their diverse disciplinary roots, concepts and terminologies. We discuss this multiplicity and use it to explore how medical education researchers have taken up complexity science in prominent journals in the field. Methods: We synthesised the health sciences and medical education literature based on 46 papers published in the last 18 years (2000–2017) to describe the patterns of use of complexity science in medical education and to consider the consequences of those patterns for our ability to advance scholarly conversations about 'complex' phenomena in our field. Results: We identified four patterns in the use of complexity science in medical education research. Firstly, complexity science is described in a variety of ways. Secondly, multiple approaches to complexity are used in combination in single papers. Thirdly, the type of complexity science used tends to be left implicit. Fourthly, the complexity orientation used is much more commonly located using secondary source citation rather than primary source citation. Conclusions: The presence of these four patterns begs the question: Do medical education scholars understand that there are multiple legitimate orientations to complexity science, deriving from distinct disciplinary origins, drawing on different metaphors and serving distinct purposes? If we do not understand this, a cascade of potential consequences awaits. We may assume that complexity science is singular in that there is only one way to do it. This assumption may cause us to perceive our way as the 'right' way and to disregard other approaches as illegitimate. However, this perception of illegitimacy may limit our ability to enter into productive dialogue about our complexity science‐inspired research. Is there an easier solution? Despite one commonly being desired, the authors invite researchers to consider that fundamental tensions are rarely about simplicity vs. complexity, but are usually about different orientations to complexity.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N