Keywords
Curriculum
Education
How to Cite
Abstract
This article is a response to an opinion article, authored by Wu JH et al. and published in JAMA 2021, vol 326 (20) which suggested the that pre-clinical (first two) years of medical school curriculum should revolve around “high-yield” resources as the dominant teaching tool. The article posited that this highly controversial view was the best way to engage with students and was published in a well-read and utilized medical journal. Due to the growing divide between learning resources provided by medical schools and outside resources actually utilized by students, the conclusions drawn in the mentioned opinion article were understandable but interpreted in the wrong vein. Herein, the authors review landmark changes in medical education over the last century and the underpinning rationale to preface their examination of the suggested changes from the mentioned opinion article. The authors conclude with recommendations from a student perspective and a continuation of the last 100 years of advancements.
References
Flexner A. Medical education in the United States and Canada. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Bulletin Number Four. 1910. Available from: http://archive.carnegiefoundation.org/publications/pdfs/elibrary/Carnegie_Flexner_Report.pdf
Wu JH, Gruppuso PA, Adashi EY. The self-directed medical student curriculum. JAMA. 2021;326(20):2005-2006. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.16312
Duffy TP. The Flexner report--100 years later. Yale J Biol Med. 2011;84(3):269-276. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3178858/
Doctors in the house: History of medical interns and residents at U-M hospitals [Internet]. University of Michigan Health. [cited 2022 Jan 3]. Available from: https://www.uofmhealth.org/news/archive/202007/doctors-house-history-medical-interns-and-residents-u-m
Tsichlis JT, Del Re AM, Carmody JB. The past, present, and future of the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Skills Examination. Cureus. 2021;13(8):e17157. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.17157
Miller G, Benke M, Chaloux B, Schroeder R, Smutz W, Swan K. Leading the e-learning transformation of higher education. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC; 2014. 270 pp.
Lieblein E. Critical factors for successful delivery of online programs. The Internet and Higher Education. 2000;3(3):161–174. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(01)00036-7
O’Doherty D, Dromey M, Lougheed J, Hannigan A, Last J, McGrath D. Barriers and solutions to online learning in medical education – an integrative review. BMC Medical Education. 2018;18(1):130. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1240-0
Xu X, Reed M. The impact of internet access on research output - a cross-country study. Information Economics and Policy. 2021;56:100914. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoecopol.2021.100914
Cantillon P, Irish B, Sales D. Using computers for assessment in medicine. BMJ. 2004;329(7466):606-609. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.329.7466.606
Clauser BE, Margolis MJ, Swanson DB. An examination of the contribution of computer-based case simulations to the USMLE Step 3 Examination. Academic Medicine. 2002;77(10):S80-S82.Available from: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200210001-00026
Clinical Fellows Complex Case Webinar [Internet]. The National Multiple Sclerosis Society [cited 2022 Jan 3]. Available from: https://www.nationalmssociety.org/For-Professionals/Clinical-Care/Professional-Education/Fellows
Ahmed H, Allaf M, Elghazaly H. COVID-19 and medical education. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2020;20(7):777–778. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30226-7
Usak M, Masalimova AR, Cherdymova EI, et al. New playmaker in science education: COVID-19. Journal of Baltic Science Education. 2020;19(2): 180–185.Available from: https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.180
Marinoni G, Van’t Land H, Jensen T. The impact of Covid-19 on higher education around the world. IAU Global Survey Report. Paris: International Association of Universities; 2020. Available from: https://www.iau-aiu.net/IMG/pdf/iau_covid19_and_he_survey_report_final_may_2020.pdf
TMS Collaborative. The perceived impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on medical student education and training – an international survey. BMC Medical Education. 2021;21:566. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02983-3
Samaraee AA. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical education. British Journal of Hospital Medicine. 2020;81(7):1–4. Available from: https://doi.org/10.12968/hmed.2020.0191
Sandhu P, de Wolf M. The impact of COVID-19 on the undergraduate medical curriculum. Medical Education Online. 2020;25(1):1764740. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2020.1764740
Compton S, Sarraf‐Yazdi S, Rustandy F, Radha Krishna LK. Medical students’ preference for returning to the clinical setting during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Medical Education. 2020;54(10):943–950. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14268
Akers A, Blough C, Iyer MS. COVID-19 implications on clinical clerkships and the residency application process for medical students. Cureus. 2020;12(4):e7800. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7800
Choi B, Jegatheeswaran L, Minocha A, Alhilani M, Nakhoul M, Mutengesa E. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on final year medical students in the United Kingdom: a national survey. BMC Medical Education. 2020;20:206. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02117-1
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.