Integrating Basic and Clinical Sciences for Medical Undergraduate Students to Enrich Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Medical students come from increasingly diverse backgrounds; this diversity reflects the populations students will eventually serve and to which medical education adapts. In 2015, the MD Undergraduate Program at the University of British Columbia (UBC) implemented a spiral curriculum emphasizing the integration of basic and clinical sciences from the first year of medical education. For students who come from non‐science backgrounds, the immediate dive into both basic and clinical science can be overwhelming. Enrichment materials, such as interactive modules, provide alternative and additional means of understanding and applying curriculum content. The purpose of this project was to develop an interactive module to supplement the topic of adrenal dysfunction by presenting clinical scenarios in the context of adrenal gland physiology. Methods Used Based on curriculum content, an interactive module combining the physiology of the adrenal gland with two different clinical scenarios on adrenal dysfunction was developed. This module was made available to all undergraduates of the UBC MD Program, but was specifically designed for second year students during their week‐long topic on adrenal dysfunction. At the end of the module, an optional survey was provided to assess the module’s design and content and to determine if similar modules would be desired. Summary of Results Upon completion of the module, all participants rated their knowledge of the adrenal cortex as Strong (66%) or Very Strong (33%), while knowledge of the two clinical scenarios was split evenly among students into Very Strong, Strong, and Average. 75% of students wished to see similar modules for curricular content, and all students felt that the module was an effective resource for the week’s content. In terms of design, 66% of participants found the study resources most useful, and all participants felt that the cases demonstrated clinical presentations and management better than average: Extremely Well (66%) and Very Well (33%) in terms of clinical presentation; and Extremely Well (33%) and Very Well (66%) in terms of management. Finally, 66% of students felt that the module did Extremely Well in terms of the integration of basic and clinical science while 33% felt it did Moderately Well. Conclusion An interactive module overall improved students’ subjective knowledge of the basic and clinical science of adrenal dysfunction. The majority of students were most appreciative of study resources and were in favour of similar enrichment modules for other curricular 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.007 |
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".