25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Innovation in early medical education, no bells or whistles required

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Despite a paucity of evidence to support a multitude of educational innovations, curricular leaders are pressured to find innovative solutions to better prepare medical students for an evolving twenty-first century health care system. As part of this effort, this study directly compared student-rated effectiveness scores of six different learning modalities.

          Methods

          Study participants included 286 medical students enrolled in the second-year rheumatology core at a single academic medical center between 2013 and 2017. Students were surveyed at the end of the core with a 15-item questionnaire, and student perceived effectiveness of six different learning modalities were compared.

          Results

          The modality that outperformed all others was Live Patient Encounters (LPE), with significantly higher student-rated effectiveness scores when compared to the referent modality of Problem-Based Learning (PBL). Using a 5-point Likert scale with responses ranging from “not effective” to “highly effective,” LPE received a mean effectiveness score of 4.77 followed by Augenblick (4.21), PBL (4.11), Gout Racer video game (3.49), Rheumatology Remedy e-module (3.49), and simulation knee injection (3.09).

          Conclusions

          Technologically advanced novel learning strategies were outperformed in this study by the more traditional active learning modality of LPE. This finding highlights the importance of testing innovative learning strategies at the level of the learner. Three additional conclusions can be drawn from this result. First, conflation of technology with innovation may lead to a myopic view of educational reform. Second, human factors seem to be responsible for the success of LPE and may have far-reaching educational rewards. Third, further applications of LPE should be tested in non-rheumatologic curricula. The relevance of this study is innately tied to the humanities-based application. While a formal qualitative analysis was not performed in this study, preliminary results suggest that live, structured patient interactions in the pre-clinical years of medical education may not only promote the learning of important educational objectives but also foster professional development, empathy, reflection, leadership, agency, and interpersonal skills. This “win-win” scenario (if true) would stand out as a rarity among strategic educational initiatives.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Active patient involvement in the education of health professionals.

          Patients as educators (teaching intimate physical examination) first appeared in the 1960s. Since then, rationales for the active involvement of patients as educators have been well articulated. There is great potential to promote the learning of patient-centred practice, interprofessional collaboration, community involvement, shared decision making and how to support self-care. We reviewed and summarised the literature on active patient involvement in health professional education. A synthesis of the literature reveals increasing diversity in the ways in which patients are involved in education, but also the movement's weaknesses. Most initiatives are 'one-off' events and are reported as basic descriptions. There is little rigorous research or theory of practice or investigation of behavioural outcomes. The literature is scattered and uses terms (such as 'patient'!) that are contentious and confusing. We propose future directions for research and development, including a taxonomy to facilitate dialogue, an outline of a research strategy and reference to a comprehensive bibliography covering all health and human services.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Just imagine: new paradigms for medical education.

            For all its traditional successes, the current model of medical education in the United States and Canada is being challenged on issues of quality, throughput, and cost, a process that has exposed numerous shortcomings in its efforts to meet the needs of the nations' health care systems. A radical change in direction is required because the current path will not lead to a solution.The 2010 publication Educating Physicians: A Call for Reform of Medical School and Residency identifies several goals for improving the medical education system, and proposals have been made to reform medical education to meet these goals. Enacting these recommendations practically and efficiently, while training more health care providers at a lower cost, is challenging.To advance solutions, the authors review innovations that are disrupting higher education and describe a vision for using these to create a new model for competency-based, learner-centered medical education that can better meet the needs of the health care system while adhering to the spirit of the above proposals. These innovations include collaboration amongst medical schools to develop massive open online courses for didactic content; faculty working in small groups to leverage this online content in a "flipped-classroom" model; and digital badges for credentialing entrustable professional activities over the continuum of learning.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Lessons learned about integrating a medical school curriculum: perceptions of students, faculty and curriculum leaders.

              Recent educational reform in US medical schools has created integrated curricular structures. This study investigated how stakeholders in a newly integrated curriculum - students, course directors and curriculum leaders - define integration and perceive its successes and challenges during its first year. We conducted interviews with curriculum reform leaders, course directors and first year medical students. Interview transcripts were analysed for themes, which were compared within and across stakeholder groups. Three curriculum leaders, four Year 1 course directors and six Year 1 medical students were interviewed. Fifteen students participated in a group interview. Four major themes emerged: interdisciplinary teaching; interdisciplinary faculty collaboration; building curricular links, and sequencing and framing curricular content. Cross-group analysis revealed participant agreement that an integrated curriculum required interdisciplinary teaching, clinical application and careful oversight. Differences among groups were also identified. Faculty (course directors and curriculum leaders) discussed faculty collaboration and the challenges of faculty buy-in and course implementation. Students highlighted the impact of integration on their learning and the challenges of sequencing and scaffolding content. Both students and course directors focused on course monitoring and conceptual links for student learning. Integrating a curriculum is a complex process. It is differentially understood and experienced by students and faculty, and can refer to instructional method, content, faculty work or synthesis of knowledge in the minds of learners. It can occur at different rates and some subjects are integrated more easily than others. We point to some specific considerations as medical schools embark on curriculum reform.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                cory.rohlfsen@unmc.edu
                hsayles@unmc.edu
                gfmoore@unmc.edu
                tmikuls@unmc.edu
                jrodell@unmc.edu
                sarah.mcbrien@unmc.edu
                tate.johnson@unmc.edu
                zdfowler@outlook.com
                acannella@unmc.edu
                Journal
                BMC Med Educ
                BMC Med Educ
                BMC Medical Education
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6920
                7 February 2020
                7 February 2020
                2020
                : 20
                : 39
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0666 4105, GRID grid.266813.8, Department of Internal Medicine, , University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC), 983332 Nebraska Medical Center, ; Omaha, NE 68198-3332 USA
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0666 4105, GRID grid.266813.8, Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, , UNMC, ; Omaha, NE USA
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0666 4105, GRID grid.266813.8, College of Medicine, , UNMC, ; Omaha, NE USA
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0666 4105, GRID grid.266813.8, Department of Rheumatology, , UNMC, ; Omaha, NE USA
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0666 4105, GRID grid.266813.8, College of Allied Health Professions, , UNMC, ; Omaha, NE USA
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0775 5412, GRID grid.266815.e, College of Information Science and Technology, , University of Nebraska Omaha, ; Omaha, NE USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4118-5174
                Article
                1947
                10.1186/s12909-020-1947-6
                7006170
                32033553
                b30e09e8-d6c8-4572-aa21-80780801a609
                © The Author(s). 2020

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 29 May 2019
                : 24 January 2020
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Education
                Education

                Comments

                Comment on this article