Difficulties with Learning Musculoskeletal Physical Examination Skills: Student Perspectives and General Lessons Learned for Curricular Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenomenon: The development of foundational clinical skills, such as physical examination, is essential to becoming a competent clinician. Musculoskeletal medicine is often considered a specialized area of practice despite the high prevalence of musculoskeletal conditions in the general population and presenting to general clinical practices. Prior work has shown that medical learners and practicing clinicians have low confidence in these skills but understanding of the student perspective on why these skills are more difficult to acquire is unclear.Approach: Our study was guided by social constructivist learning theory to explore the learner experience and present their perspectives. Qualitative analysis investigated the difference between learning musculoskeletal physical examination versus other body systems, using the voices from 11 semi-structured focus group interviews. Participants included third-year medical students across two academic cohorts at one institution. Our analysis was grounded in the principles of phenomenology and used triangulation and reflexivity to provide rigorous analysis.Findings: Students provided rich and insightful perspectives regarding their experiences in learning musculoskeletal physical examination techniques. Four themes were developed from our data: a) the need for opportunities for both supervised and self-directed practice; b) assessment and competence as motivations for learning; c) the need for a different approach to the content and structure of musculoskeletal medicine and its associated examination techniques; and d) the need for distinct expertise and technical skill from musculoskeletal examination teachers.Insights: This study provides a valuable lens to critically reflect on existing curriculum and pedagogical approaches to musculoskeletal examination skills. Lessons from this study may be applicable to curriculum design in general, especially the teaching of physical examination skills, such as how it is taught and integrated with other content (including anatomy), how much practice is required, who teaches physical examination skills, and what faculty development is needed to standardize teaching. Promoting a learner-centered approach to the teaching and learning of these clinical skills will be beneficial to all stakeholders, especially to our future physicians and their patients.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2021.1954930 .
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".