scholarly journals A Comparison of Third-year Medical Student Clinical and Examination Performances in a Traditional Psychiatry Clerkship to a Novel Pilot, LSI Curriculum

2016 ◽  
pp. 7-10
Author(s):  
Niedermier Julie ◽  
Julie Teater ◽  
David Kasick ◽  
Maryam Jahdi
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Medical Knowledge ◽  
Pilot Program ◽  
Traditional Curriculum ◽  
National Board ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Subject Examination ◽  
Medical Examiners ◽  
Clinical Measures

Objective: The goal of this study was to compare educational outcomes of medical students who participated in a longitudinal pilot curriculum to those who participated in the existing, traditional curriculum during their third-year of medical school. Method: The authors reviewed clinical evaluations and examination performances of 15 students enrolled in a pilot curriculum to 60 students who participated in the traditional curriculum. The nove Lead.Serve.Inspire. (LSI) curriculum consisted of a longitudinal integrated hybrid of internal medicine, neurology, and psychiatry rotations and didactic instruction spanning nearly four months. Results: The National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) subject examination class averages of students enrolled in the combined internal medicine, neurology, and psychiatry pilot program were not significantly different compared to students completing these examinations and enrolled in the traditional block rotations during the same time period. On clinical performance measures in psychiatry, students performed above average on clinical measures of medical knowledge, communication skills, and diagnostic assessment and critical analysis skills. Conclusion: Preliminary data from the pilot program is promising, suggesting that the Lead.Serve.Inspire. (LSI) curriculum may offer an equitable alternative to the traditional discipline-specific block rotations.

Nasce uma nova especialidade : osteopatia

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Antônio Guimarães Da Silva
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Preventive Medicine ◽  
Rio De Janeiro ◽  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
Physical Medicine ◽  
National Board ◽  
Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation ◽  
Allergy And Immunology ◽  
Medical Examiners

Por circunstâncias relacionadas à minha titulação, acabei designado pela Universidade Castelo Branco do Rio de Janeiro (UCB) para avaliar uma parceria proposta pela Escola de Osteopatia de Madri (EOM). À época, em 1997, a EOM propunha que a UCB passasse a organizar academicamente os cursos de osteopatia que a referida Escola já vinha ministrando no Brasil, com vistas a, no futuro, torná-lo um curso de pós-graduação. Algumas viagens à Madri para observar a estrutura acadêmica e pedagógica da sede da EOM, condição imposta pela UCB para concretizar a parceria, me levaram a conhecer esta modalidade terapêutica, com resultados efetivamente comprovados através de trabalhos científicos.Realizadas as adaptações que se faziam necessárias, a UCB aprovou, em 2000, o curso de osteopatia, com uma carga horária de 1050 horas para a titulação de especialização acadêmica, nível Lato Sensu. A resolução do COFITO, que estabelece a osteopatia como uma especialidade da fisioterapia, levou-nos a propor ao CEPE da UCB uma complementação de 450 horas, alcançando, assim, as 1.500 horas, distribuídas ao longo de cinco anos, exigidas pela referida resolução do COFITO. A introdução desta técnica terapêutica no Brasil pela corrente Européia e a pronta intervenção do COFITO foram fatores decisivos para nos brindar com mais uma especialidade. Houvera sido a Osteopatia implantada no Brasil por influência da escola americana, talvez os rumos tomados fossem outros. Senão, vejamos. Nos EUA, a osteopatia é normalmente exercida pelo médico, que deve obter sua permissão através do National Board of Osteopatic Medical Examiners, e está dividida em Sociedades Osteopáticas que se distribuem por todas as modalidades médicas; a saber: Allergy and Immunology, Anesthesiology, Dermatology ,Emergency Medicine, Internal Medicine, Neurologists and Psychiatrists, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Occupational and Preventive Medicine, Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology, Orthopedics Pathology, Pediatrics Proctology, Radiology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rheumatology Sports Surgery Medicine.Com o objetivo de incentivar as linhas de pesquisas na área da osteopatia, estará sendo criado, durante as III Jornadas Hispano-Lusas de Fisioterapia em Terapia Manual (Sevilha-Espanha, 5 de outubro de 2001), o Centro Internacional de Pesquisas em Osteopatia. O referido Centro, dirigido por um fisioterapeuta brasileiro com Doutorado, terá sua sede na Espanha e manterá núcleos, vinculados a Universidades, na Argentina, no Brasil, na Itália, em Portugal e na Venezuela. Esperamos, desta forma, ao lado do reconhecimento profissional já oferecido pela resolução COFITO, dar mais um passo na consolidação acadêmica da nossa mais nova modalidade terapêutica.

scholarly journals How do we assess resilience and grit among internal medicine residents at the Mayo Clinic? A longitudinal validity study including correlations with medical knowledge, professionalism and clinical performance

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e040699
Author(s):  
Fares Alahdab ◽  
Andrew J Halvorsen ◽  
Jayawant N Mandrekar ◽  
Brianna E Vaa ◽  
Victor M Montori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Test Performance ◽  
Mayo Clinic ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Medical Knowledge ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Validity Study ◽  
Training Environment ◽  
Conference Attendance

BackgroundThere has been limited research on the positive aspects of physician wellness and to our knowledge there have been no validity studies on measures of resilience and grit among internal medicine (IM) residents.ObjectivesTo investigate the validity of resilience (10 items Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC 10)) and grit (Short Grit Scale (GRIT-S)) scores among IM residents at a large academic centre, and assess potential associations with previously validated measures of medical knowledge, clinical performance and professionalism.MethodsWe evaluated CD-RISC 10 and GRIT-S instrument scores among IM residents at the Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota between July 2017 and June 2019. We analysed dimensionality, internal consistency reliability and criterion validity in terms of relationships between resilience and grit, with standardised measures of residents’ medical knowledge (in-training examination (ITE)), clinical performance (faculty and peer evaluations and Mini-Clinical Evaluation Examination (mini-CEX)) and professionalism/dutifulness (conference attendance and evaluation completion).ResultsA total of 213 out of 253 (84.2%) survey-eligible IM residents provided both CD-RISC 10 and GRIT-S survey responses. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha) was excellent for CD-RISC 10 (0.93) and GRIT-S (0.82) overall, and for the GRIT subscales of consistency of interest (0.84) and perseverance of effort (0.71). CD-RISC 10 scores were negatively associated with ITE percentile (β=−3.4, 95% CI −6.2 to −0.5, p=0.02) and mini-CEX (β=−0.2, 95% CI −0.5 to −0.02, p=0.03). GRIT-S scores were positively associated with evaluation completion percentage (β=2.51, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.67, p=0.02) and conference attendance (β=2.70, 95% CI 0.11 to 5.29, p=0.04).ConclusionsThis study revealed favourable validity evidence for CD-RISC 10 and GRIT-S among IM residents. Residents demonstrated resilience within a competitive training environment despite less favourable test performance and grittiness that was manifested by completing tasks. This initial validity study provides a foundation for further research on resilience and grit among physicians in training.

scholarly journals The Special Purpose Examination: An Evaluation of Physicians Taking SPEX and their Pass Rates

2014 ◽  
Vol 100 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-14
Author(s):  
Frances E. Cain ◽  
Phil Davignon ◽  
Thomas R. Henzel ◽  
Andrea Ciccone ◽  
Aaron Young
Keyword(s):  
Medical Knowledge ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Pass Rates ◽  
National Board ◽  
Disciplinary Process ◽  
Basic Medical Knowledge ◽  
State Medical Boards ◽  
Medical Examiners ◽  
Basic Medical

ABSTRACT State medical boards have long recognized the importance of evaluating the ongoing knowledge and competence of licensed physicians under a variety of circumstances. Before granting or renewing a license, it may be necessary for state boards to evaluate physicians as part of a disciplinary process or following a period of inactivity for either disciplinary or non-disciplinary reasons. The Post-Licensure Assessment System (PLAS), a joint program of the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) and the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME), has played a role in assisting state boards with evaluating physicians' basic medical knowledge in all of these circumstances by providing the Special Purpose Examination (SPEX). While SPEX has been administered since 1988, there has not been a nationally published study summarizing the characteristics of physicians taking the exam and their examination pass rates. To address this, we examined physicians who took SPEX between 2003 and 2011, and the outcomes of their exams. Our research demonstrates that the majority of examinees take SPEX for non-disciplinary reasons, with those who take SPEX for disciplinary reasons having lower pass rates. Future research should focus on evaluating the ultimate outcomes for physicians taking SPEX, including the ability to attain and retain a license to practice medicine.

scholarly journals Identifying Students at Risk of Failing the USMLE Step 2 Clinical Skills Examination

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (6) ◽  
pp. 483-499
Author(s):  
Susan Rosenthal ◽  
Stefani Russo ◽  
Katherine Berg ◽  
Joseph Majdan ◽  
Jennifer Wilson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Student Performance ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Clinical Skills ◽  
Students At Risk ◽  
National Board ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Subject Examination ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Faculty Ratings ◽  
Medical Examiners

Background and Objectives: New standards announced in 2017 could increase the failure rate for Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS). The purpose of this study was to identify student performance metrics associated with risk of failing. Methods: Data for 1,041 graduates of one medical school from 2014 through 2017 were analyzed, including 30 (2.9%) failures. Metrics included Medical College Admission Test, United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1, and clerkship National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Subject Examination scores; faculty ratings in six clerkships; and scores on an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Bivariate statistics and regression were used to estimate risk of failing. Results: Those failing had lower Step 1 scores, NBME scores, faculty ratings, and OSCE scores (P<.02). Students with four or more low ratings were more likely to fail compared to those with fewer low ratings (relative risk [RR], 12.76, P<.0001). Logistic regression revealed other risks: low surgery NBME scores (RR 3.75, P=.02), low pediatrics NBME scores (RR 3.67, P=.02), low ratings in internal medicine (RR 3.42, P=.004), and low OSCE Communication/Interpersonal Skills (RR 2.55, P=.02). Conclusions: Certain medical student performance metrics are associated with risk of failing Step 2 CS. It is important to clarify these and advise students accordingly.

Influence of clerkship sites on National Board of Medical Examiners surgery subject examination performance

2015 ◽  
Vol 210 (2) ◽  
pp. 396-400 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca M. Rentea ◽  
Brian D. Lewis ◽  
Amy J. Leisten ◽  
Robert Treat ◽  
Philip N. Redlich
Keyword(s):  
National Board ◽  
Examination Performance ◽  
Subject Examination ◽  
Medical Examiners

scholarly journals Effect of Repeat Examination on Family Medicine NBME Subject Scores

PRiMER ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Minor ◽  
Sarah E. Stumbar ◽  
Rodolfo Bonnin ◽  
Marquita Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Family Medicine ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Performance Outcomes ◽  
Individual Student ◽  
Clinical Knowledge ◽  
National Board ◽  
Subject Examination ◽  
Repeat Examination ◽  
Medical Examiners ◽  
Academic Year

Introduction: National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) subject examinations are used by many schools to assess student clinical knowledge. Studies indicate that mean scores on NBME examinations improve as the clinical year progresses. Literature review revealed no studies investigating changes in individual student scores when end-of-block examinations were repeated at the end of the clinical year. This study investigated NBME family medicine subject examination score changes for students who opted to repeat the examination at the end of the academic year. Methods: In 2014, students on a 4-week family medicine block clerkship took the NBME subject examination at the end of their clerkship block and were offered the opportunity to repeat this examination at the end of that clinical year; 25 of 80 students voluntarily repeated the examination. Paired t-tests were used to compare performance outcomes between the exam means at the end of the clerkship blocks to the means on the exam administration at the end of the academic year. Results: Results showed a statistically significant improvement in scores between the first and second examination administration. Examinations given immediately after the students’ clinical experience yielded scaled scores ranging from 60 to 80 compared to the national mean of 71.9. Examinations given at the end of the clinical year yielded scaled scores ranging from 57 to 90 (t[24]=-2.66, P=0.0006). Conclusion: Repeating the NBME subject examination at the end of the year led to slightly increased scores, suggesting that time spent during clerkships influences examination performance.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document