PsychED – A National Teaching Programme to Boost Medical Student Engagement in Psychiatry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction In the 2019 Choose Psychiatry guidance for medical schools in the UK, medical students voiced a need for more extracurricular activities focused on mental health. They specifically requested the inclusion of psychiatric clinicians in their education to deepen their understanding of psychiatry and its different roles. Applications for core psychiatry training have risen dramatically, leading to oversubscription in recent years. In response to this demand, PsychED UK, a national teaching programme was created to further foster students’ knowledge and interest in psychiatry. Objectives - Increase medical students’ engagement in psychiatry as a career. - Enhance students’ knowledge and confidence in psychiatric practice. - Boost interest in psychiatry through practical insights and exposure. Methods Between December 2023 and February 2024, six one-hour teaching sessions were offered to medical students and Foundation Programme trainees through Medall, a virtual healthcare platform, delivered by consultants, registrars, and core trainees, ensuring a broad range of experiences. In order to increase engagement we selected different types of presentation content: session 1 and session 4 focused on practical and personal tips on life as a psychiatry trainee, session 2 and session 3 delivered high-yield content tailored to support exam revision and lastly session 5 and session 6 gave an insight into subspecialties, providing a glimpse into exciting career pathways beyond the general practice. Pre- and post-session questionnaires were used to measure the satisfaction scores, including likert scale ratings focusing on the student’s knowledge, confidence, and interest in a career in psychiatry and free text box for qualatative data. Results We had a strong turnout, with 126 attendees participating across six sessions. The audience included a diverse range of individuals, from first-year medical students to Foundation Year 2 trainees, with participants joining from across the UK and even internationally. The results showed strong overall satisfaction, with all sessions scoring 77% or higher. Sessions 1, 3, and 4 received the highest satisfaction ratings, and Sessions 1 and 4 had the highest percentage of attendees providing feedback, indicating strong engagement with the content. Free-text feedback analysis highlighted that attendees were seeking more personal experiences and insights from current core trainees. Image 1: Image 2: Conclusions The PsychED UK programme effectively enhanced medical students’ knowledge and confidence in psychiatry, addressing key areas identified in previous student feedback. Based on these positive results, a second series of teaching sessions is planned, with further refinements to the programme. Due to the high level of engagement and satisfaction with sessions 1 and 4, the second cycle will be presented by two speakers in a conversational format, focusing on the experiences of psychiatry trainees. Disclosure of Interest None Declared
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.004 |
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".