One Week with the Experts: A Short Course Improves Musculoskeletal Undergraduate Medical Education
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal problems constitute a considerable workload across all medical and surgical disciplines. There is a mismatch between the burden of musculoskeletal medicine seen by non-orthopaedists clinically and the amount of time afforded it in undergraduate training. Recent initiatives to address this include the United States Bone and Joint Decade and curricular innovations that demonstrate a benefit from improved instruction. Such curricular interventions are usually situated within a wider program reform and last a short time. Gaining institutional support and securing curricular time are challenging. This article shows the positive evaluation of a brief, intense course on musculoskeletal medicine. METHODS: A one-week course was offered to 154 medical students. The study took place in Ireland, where the student body comprises a mix of graduate students and undergraduate students, who enter medical school directly from second-level education. This course comprised brief didactic talks, case-based small group work, and physical examination skills demonstration. Attitudes toward musculoskeletal medicine prior to the course were elicited. The course was evaluated using pre-course and post-course standardized cognitive tests. Long-term retention was evaluated by end-of-year extended matching questions and an objective standardized clinical examination station. The test results between undergraduate and graduate students and student rating of musculoskeletal medicine as important or less important were compared. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 125 students (81%). Seventy-four percent of students rated musculoskeletal medicine to be of major or critical importance to their career. There was a significant difference (p < 0.001, r = 0.678) in the mean score of the standardized cognitive test between the pre-course test and the post-course test; the mean performance score (and standard deviation) was 48.2% ± 14.2% (range, 17% to 79%), with a pass rate of 3.3%, for the pre-course test and 75.3% ± 15.02% (range, 32% to 100%), with a pass rate of 61%, for the post-course test. At the end of the year, 69.9% of students passed the extended matching questions and 96.7% passed an objective standardized clinical examination station. Graduate students performed better on the post-course standardized cognitive test score (p < 0.001) and objective standardized clinical examination (p < 0.05). Students who rated musculoskeletal medicine as important did not perform better than those who rated it as less important (p = 0.334). CONCLUSIONS: We report a favorable evaluation of a short, intense course on musculoskeletal medicine and suggest that the introduction of basic concepts of musculoskeletal medicine is feasible within established curricula.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».