Evaluation Scale of Clinicians’ Views and Expectations About Academics and Academic Productivity Process, Validity and Reliability Study

Basic medical education, clinical education and academician processes are closely related concepts. Long-term professional practice can disrupt the harmony between these dynamic processes. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the answers given by clinicians who try to balance the triangle of basic and clinical medical education, patient relations and academic life to questions about their academic processes. The questionnaire, consisting of nineteen closed-ended questions, was answered by clinicians who are experts in their fields, academics and non-academicians, the data obtained were scaled, analyzed and evaluated, and the results were interpreted.

Views of Physicians on the Persistence and Efficiency of Basic Medical Sciences Education

Introduction: In this study, it is aimed to contribute to the persistence of the basic medical sciences education given in medical faculties, how much it can be integrated into clinical science practices and to the development of education. Materials and Methods: The study was planned in a descriptive type and a questionnaire was applied to collect the data. The population of the study consisted of medical faculty graduates and there was no limitation in the selection of the sample. The level of agreement with the statements was graded from 1 to 5 with Likert-type scaling. In the study with a total of 205 participants, numbers and percentages were used for the data. Results: Of the physicians 59.5% stated that the basic medical sciences courses they took were not sufficient and permanent for their professional life, 69.74% of them stated that the course topics in basic medical sciences education are too detailed, 60.48% of them stated they could not integrate the education they received in basic medical sciences into clinical sciences, 82.91% stated that it would be more beneficial to give basic medicine and clinical medical sciences courses simultaneously, and 86.82% of them stated that the technology-adapted auxiliary course tools will increase the quality of basic medical education. Conclusion: In today's world where important developments are experienced in medical education, innovations are needed in order to train physicians in the best way. For this, it is necessary to work on a system in which basic medicine and clinical medical sciences are integrated, the course curriculum is revised and a strong technological infrastructure is provided.

A proposal for the future of medical education accreditation in Korea

For the past 20 years, the medical education accreditation program of the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation (KIMEE) has contributed significantly to the standardization and improvement of the quality of basic medical education in Korea. It should now contribute to establishing and promoting the future of medical education. The Accreditation Standards of KIMEE 2019 (ASK2019) have been adopted since 2019, with the goal of achieving world-class medical education by applying a learner-centered curriculum using a continuum framework for the 3 phases of formal medical education: basic medical education, postgraduate medical education, and continuing professional development. ASK2019 will also be able to promote medical education that meets community needs and employs systematic assessments throughout the education process. These are important changes that can be used to gauge the future of the medical education accreditation system. Furthermore, globalization, inter-professional education, health systems science, and regular self-assessment systems are emerging as essential topics for the future of medical education. It is time for the medical education accreditation system in Korea to observe and adopt new trends in global medical education.

Comparison of problem-based and team-based learning on Chinese basic medical education for clinical medicine: a pilot study

Background Since being proposed half a century ago, problem-based learning (PBL) and team-based learning (TBL) have been two popular teaching approaches used in Chinese basic medical education. To compensate for the shortcomings of lecture-based learning (LBL), both PBL and TBL can greatly benefit students. This study compares the differences of PBL and TBL on active learning and final academic scores in Chinese basic medical curriculum at Shantou University Medical College (SUMC). Methods Ten Year 4 and thirteen Year 3 medical students, enrolled in 2015 and 2016 at SUMC, were selected for TBL and PBL, respectively. In the homeostasis module, a basic-medical curriculum used in China, TBL was used for Year 4 students at their 3rd year, and PBL was used for Year 3 students. Student feedback was collected through a questionnaire. Academic achievement was based on their final examination scores. Each grade used the same final examination paper, which included both memorization and clinical application questions, as students in the traditional LBL class. Quantitative data were analyzed by t- and nonparametric tests. Results All students completed the questionnaire. Most students (PBL:62%, TBL:90%) thought the teaching approach they used was good for training clinical thinking, but PBL required more time and imposed a greater study burden. However, PBL students received higher scores than LBL students for clinical application essays (p < 0.05), whereas there were no differences in memorization problem scores. Final academic scores showed no significant differences between TBL and LBL students (p > 0.05). Conclusion Despite the differences in the culture of learning between China and the West, TBL and PBL are two popular teaching approaches among Chinese medical students. In Chinese basic medical education, PBL is more effective in training clinical thinking, while in TBL, students spend less time with problems and are helped by the professors. The relevant assessment system and teacher training system should be perfected.

Changes in the accreditation standards of medical schools by the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation from 2000 to 2019

This review presents information on changes in the accreditation standards of medical schools in Korea by the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation (KIMEE) from 2000 to 2019. Specifically, the following aspects are explained: the development process, setting principles and directions, evaluation items, characteristics of the standards, and validity testing over the course of 4 cycles. The first cycle of accreditation (2000–2005) focused on ensuring the minimum requirements for the educational environment. The evaluation criteria emphasized the core elements of medical education, including facilities and human resources. The second cycle of accreditation (2007–2010) emphasized universities’ commitment to social accountability and the pursuit of excellence in medical education. It raised the importance of qualitative standards for judging the content and quality of education. In the post-second accreditation cycle (2012–2018) which means third accreditation cycle, accreditation criteria were developed to standardize the educational environment and programs and to be used for curriculum development in order to continually improve the quality of basic medical education. Most recently, the ASK 2019 (Accreditation Standards of KIMEE 2019) accreditation cycle focused on qualitative evaluations in accordance with the World Federation of Medical Education’s accreditation criteria to reach the international level of basic medical education, which emphasizes the need for a student-centered curriculum, communication with society, and evaluation through a comprehensive basic medical education course. The KIMEE has developed a basic medical education evaluation and accreditation system in a step-by-step manner, as outlined above. Understanding previous processes will be helpful for the future development of accreditation criteria for medical schools in Korea.

National competency frameworks for medical graduates: Is it time for the “SudanMeds”?

Competency-based medical education has emerged recently as a novel model of medical training driven by its ability to reconcile the desired attributes in future physicians and address the overarching and demanding issues of the discipline in this century. The rising concerns of social accountability, patient safety, and cost effectiveness of medical education programs have contributed significantly to the popularity of this paradigm worldwide. This is translated in turn to the evolution of national competency frameworks for medical graduates that are increasingly implemented in different jurisdictions to standardize and ensure equivalent outcomes of medical curricula and readiness of their graduates to better serve their communities. Medical education in Sudan is deeply rooted in the history of the nation and the continent and is tinged with remarkable success and achievements. It is challenged nowadays with unprecedented expansion in basic medical education which may hinder the quality of medical schools’ programs and their graduates. This article explores the feasibility of one such framework in Sudan: the “SudanMeds” to ensure minimum standards and comparability of medical schools’ curricula and their outcomes across the Country. The framework would also arm the regulatory bodies with a tool for accreditation and recognition of basic medical education programs in Sudan and reflect quality assurance in their settings. Once this approach is deemed feasible, the contribution of all stakeholders from the highest top to the bottom – the government, the regulatory bodies, the public and civil organizations, and the medical schools’ community – is required to allow for creation, implementation, and follow-up of the “SudanMeds” framework. Keywords: Sudan, competency-based medical education, national competency frameworks, medical schools, basic medical education

Challenges towards quality assurance of Basic Medical Education in Pakistan

Objective: There are growing concerns towards the quality of medical education in Pakistan. To help strengthen accreditation processes, this study identifies the challenges towards quality assurance of Basic Medical Education in Pakistan. Methods: A qualitative case study was carried out from March to August 2018. Participants included inspectors from various disciplines in both public and private medical colleges, and medical educationists from Pakistan. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 inspectors, while focus group discussion included 10 medical educationists. All the interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was conducted to capture the intricacies of meaning within the data. Results: Data identified 14 sub-themes grouped under three major themes. Challenges towards quality assurance included mounting political influence, commercialism in medical education, weak regulatory capacity of accrediting body, violation of rules, lack of valid accreditation standards and skilled inspectors. Conclusion: Quality assurance of Basic Medical Education in Pakistan involves various systemic, resource and personnel related challenges. The accrediting body needs to bring major reforms in its accreditation system and strengthen its regulatory and technical educational capacity to ensure the quality of medical education in nearly 168 medical and dental colleges of the country. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.2.1319 How to cite this:Khan AW, Sethi A, Wajid G, Yasmeen R . Challenges towards quality assurance of Basic Medical Education in Pakistan. Pak J Med Sci. 2020;36(2):---------. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.2.1319 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.