醫學人文教育核心能力：以名義團體技巧來進行探討

Defining the Core Competencies of Medical Humanities Education through the Nominal Group Technique

10.6145/jme.200806_12(2).0002

蔡詩力(Stanley SL Tsai)；張上淳(Shan-Chwen Chang)；何明蓉(Ming-Jung Ho)

醫學人文 ； 名義團體技巧 ； 核心能力 ； medical humanities ； nominal group technique ； core competency

Journal of Medical Education

12卷2期（2008 / 06 / 01）

70 - 76

繁體中文

醫學人文教育一直是國內外醫學教育很基本而且重要的一項要素，然而由於醫學人文教育涵括的範圍廣泛，因此對這方面的教育成效也一直缺乏共識，以至於要設計一套適當的課程或是設計教學與評估的方式都有實際的困難。本研究引用名義團體技巧來探討醫學人文教育所應具備之核心能力，希望能夠發展共同理念與解決問題，藉由本研究進一步得到的「半定量」的資料，這些資料有助於應用在修正處置的方式、臨床指引的編訂以及醫學院的學程評估等。參與研究的49位醫學教育專家來自國內十一所醫學院校，所有參加的學者皆為自願參與，會前並先將報名人員隨機分成六個小組，每組七到十人不等。本研究最後的結果，與會專家們對醫學人文教育的要項作出以下的重要性排序：同情心與同理心（三十六分）、溝通（十七分）、責任感（十二分）、誠信（九分）、博學多聞（六分）、尊重（五分）、團隊合作（三分）。同情心與同理心被與會專家們視為是最重要的一項，但是這是一個相當抽象的概念，且包含了很多的行為層面，並不易被具體地觀察與測量；如何將此概念做進一步的解構，進而轉化為可評估、測量的項目？如何設計培養同情心與同理心的課程？這種種的問題都有賴更進一步的研究與探討。

Medical humanities education is generally regarded as an essential component of medical education globally and locally. However, the scope of the medical humanities is so broad that there is no agreement on the outcomes of medical humanities education. Without clearly defined outcomes, we are unable to properly develop a curriculum and then devise teaching and assessment strategies that coincide with the objectives/outcomes. In this study, forty-nine medical educators came from all eleven medical schools; these educators had volunteered to participate in a faculty development workshop on integrating the medical humanities into the longitudinal medical curriculum. They were randomly assigned to six small groups of 7 to 10 people with the aim of developing the core competence of medical humanities education. By means of nominal group technique (NGT) meeting, the problem can be approached from a variety of perspectives. The method helps to produce semi-quantitative data that can be used to change management, to create clinical guidelines, and to carry out course evaluation at medical schools. The results of the

1. 劉介修、劉克明(2004)。醫學人文概念與實踐初探。醫學教育，8，371-384。
   連結：
2. Campo R,Campo R(2005).A piece of my mind. "The medical humanities," for lack of a better term.JAMA,294,1009-1011.
3. Cassell EJ(1984).The place of the humanities in medicine.New York:The Hastings Center Institute of Society, Ethics and Life Sciences.
4. Chappie M,Murphy R(1996).The nominal group technique; extending the evaluation of students` teaching and learning experience.Assess Eval Higher Educ,21,147-159.
5. CoBaTrICE Collaboration,Bion JF,Barrett H(2006).Development of core competencies for an international training programme in intensive care medicine.Intensive Care Med,32,1371-1383.
6. Coyle YM,Battles JB,Tysinger JW(1997).Developing strategic plans for academic general internal medicine.Am J Med,102,470-476.
7. Delbecq A,Ven A(1971).A group process model for problem identification and program planning.J Appl Behav Sci,7,466-492.
8. Dobbie A,Rhodes M,Tysinger J(2002).Using a modified nominal group technique as a curriculum evaluation tool.Fam Med,36,402-406.
9. Gallagher M,HARES T,SPENCER J(1993).The nominal group technique: a research tool for general practice?.Fam Pract,10,76-81.
10. General Medical Council(1993).Tomorrow's Doctors: recommendations on undergraduate medical education.London:GMC.
11. Gordon JJ,Evans HM(2007).Learning medicine from the hum19a.nities.Edinburgh:association for the study of medical education.
12. Hunter D,Jones J(1995).Consensus methods for medical and health services research.BMJ,311,376-380.
13. Kern DE,Thomas PA,Howard DM(1998).Curriculum development for medical eudcation: a six-step approach.Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press.
14. Kirklin D,Kirklin D(2001).Humanities in medical training and education.Clin Med,1,25-27.
15. Moore A(1976).Medical humanities: a new medical adventure.NEJM,295,1479-1480.
16. Pozo PR,Fins JJ(2005).The globalization of education in medical ethics and humanities: evolving pedagogy at Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar.Acad Med,80,135-140.
17. Rider EA,Nawotniak RH,Sminth G(2007).A practical guide to 2te0a. ching and assessing the ACGME core competencies.Marblehead, MA:HCPro.
18. Villiers M,Bresnick G,Mash B(2003).The value of small group learning: an evaluation of an innovative CPD programme for primary care medical practitioners.Med Educ,37,815-821.
19. 謝博生(1997)。醫學教育模式之變遷。醫學教育，1，141-147。

1. Tsai, Shih-Li,Chu, Tzong-Shinn,Chen, Te-Chuan,Chang, Shan-Chwen(2016).Core Competencies of Standardized Patient in Taiwan: Considering Local and Cultural Issues.醫學教育,20(1),45-52.
2. Wang, Wei-Dean,Leung, Kai-Kuen,Chen, Yen-Yuan(2011).Some Thoughts about Medical Humanities Education.醫學教育,15(3),1-7.
3. 蔡育倫,廖珍娟,陳淑貞,洪愛琇,李易靜,尹玓(2015).新進護理人員及護理臨床教師對二年期訓練計畫評量方式之滿意度.源遠護理,9(1),26-36.
4. 謝明儒,胡正申(2022)。醫學漫畫媒材融入人際互動學習同理心之研究。長庚人文社會學報，15(2)，119-157。
5. 楊泮池、黃天祥、余坤興、何明蓉(2010)。再探醫學專業素養—以名義團體技巧進行探討。醫學教育，14(1)，15-22。
6. (2024)。困難醫病溝通下醫療人員需具備的技巧：實習醫學生與專家的觀點比較。台灣家庭醫學雜誌，34(2)，84-93。
7. (2024)。探討主題式教學融入中文經典課程提升醫學大學生之人文素養成效：以「蘇東坡的文化面向」博雅課程為例。通識學刊：理念與實務，12(2)，45-77+79。