↓ Skip to main content

Reflection-Based Learning for Professional Ethical Formation

Overview of attention for article published in The AMA Journal of Ethic, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reflection-Based Learning for Professional Ethical Formation
Published in
The AMA Journal of Ethic, April 2017
DOI 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.4.medu1-1704
Pubmed ID
Authors

William T Branch, Maura George

Abstract

One way practitioners learn ethics is by reflecting on experience. They may reflect in the moment (reflection-in-action) or afterwards (reflection-on-action). We illustrate how a teaching clinician may transform relationships with patients and teach person-centered care through reflective learning. We discuss reflective learning pedagogies and present two case examples of our preferred method, guided group reflection using narratives. This method fosters moral development alongside professional identity formation in students and advanced learners. Our method for reflective learning addresses and enables processing of the most pressing ethical issues that learners encounter in practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 18%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Lecturer 3 5%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 15%
Psychology 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 17 28%