Developing an Undergraduate Ultrasound Curriculum: A Needs Assessment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The introduction of ultrasound into the undergraduate medical school curriculum is gaining momentum in North America. At present, many institutions are teaching ultrasound to undergraduate medical students using a traditional framework designed to instruct practicing clinicians, or have modeled the curriculum on other universities. This approach is not based on educational needs or supported by evidence. Methods Using a descriptive, cross-sectional survey of stakeholder groups, we assessed the perceived relevance of various ultrasound skills and the attitude towards implementing an undergraduate ultrasound curriculum at our university. Results One hundred and fifty survey respondents representing all major stakeholder groups participated. All medical students, 97% of residents and 82% of educators agreed that the introduction of an ultrasound curriculum would enhance medical students' understanding of anatomy and physiology. All clinical medical students and residents, 92% of preclinical medical students, and 82% of educators agreed that the curriculum should also include clinical applications of ultrasound. Participants also indicated their preferences for specific curriculum content based on their perceived needs. Conclusion An integrated undergraduate ultrasound curriculum composed of specific preclinical and clinical applications was deemed appropriate for our university following a comprehensive needs assessment. Other universities planning such curricula should consider employing a needs assessment to provide direction for curriculum need and content.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it