Structured Engagement of Community Partners to Revise a Pregnancy Options Counseling Curriculum for Pediatric Residents

Laura Kirkpatrick; Paula Goldman; Lauren Arnold Bell; Crystal Pirtle Tyler; Elizabeth Harrison; Margaret Russell; Tahniat Syed; Nicholas Szoko; Traci M Kazmerski

doi:10.1177/23821205231190476

Structured Engagement of Community Partners to Revise a Pregnancy Options Counseling Curriculum for Pediatric Residents

J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2023 Jul 27:10:23821205231190476. doi: 10.1177/23821205231190476. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.

Authors

Laura Kirkpatrick¹, Paula Goldman¹, Lauren Arnold Bell², Crystal Pirtle Tyler³, Elizabeth Harrison¹, Margaret Russell¹, Tahniat Syed¹, Nicholas Szoko¹, Traci M Kazmerski^{1

4}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Pediatrics, UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
² Department of Pediatrics, Riley Children's Hospital, 705 Riley Hospital Drive, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
³ Rhia Ventures, San Francisco, CA, USA.
⁴ Center for Innovative Research on Gender Health Equity, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

Abstract

Objective: The engagement of community partners, including patients, is increasingly recognized as important in developing medical education curricula. Structured methodology for partner engagement in curriculum development is lacking in the existing literature. This article describes a structured approach to engaging community partners to provide input on revising a curriculum for pediatric residents about pregnancy options counseling with adolescents.

Methods: We used the five-step Method for Program Adaptation through Community Engagement: (1) development of a panel of community partners including patients and professionals, (2) and (3) partner evaluation of the existing curriculum and recommendations for revisions, (4) summarization of partner feedback, and (5) development of the revised curriculum. We surveyed partners about their perceived impact on the revision and satisfaction with the process.

Results: Seventeen partners participated. Five experienced adolescent pregnancy, while the remaining 12 included healthcare and social service professionals. All partners provided multiple recommendations, generating 124 discrete recommendations. Twenty recommendations were suggested by multiple individuals. The authors reviewed all recommendations by category during consensus meetings and determined which recommendations would be incorporated into the revised curriculum to meet stated learning objectives. We implemented 14 of these 20 recommendations, including adding a values clarification exercise, information about mental health crisis resources, and more detail about adoption. We also incorporated 15 individual recommendations pertaining to curriculum clarity. Recommendations from professionals and patients were similar. Fourteen out of 17 participants completed the survey at the close of the project. All respondents understood their roles, were satisfied with their degree of engagement, and felt that their expectations for participation were met or exceeded.

Conclusions: This study describes a methodology for a formal process to engage community partners in curriculum development and revision processes. Such methodology can ensure that medical education curricula are optimally attuned to the needs of key community members and integrate the patient's voice.

Keywords: Medical education; community engagement; pregnancy options counseling.