Dataset Information

A survey of collection development for United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) and National Board Dental Examination (NBDE) preparation material.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The research sought to ascertain medical and dental libraries' collection development policies, evaluation methods, purchase decisions, and issues that relate to print and electronic United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) and National Board Dental Examination (NBDE) preparation materials.

Methods

The investigators surveyed librarians supporting American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC)-accredited medical schools (n = 58/125) on the USMLE and librarians supporting American Dental Association (ADA)-accredited dental schools (n = 23/56) on the NBDE. The investigators analyzed the data by cross-tabulating and filtering the results using EFM Continuum web survey software. Investigators also surveyed print and electronic USMLE and NBDE preparation materials from 2004-2007 to determine the number of publications and existence of reviews.

Results

A majority of responding AAMC libraries (62%, n = 58) provide at least 1 electronic or online USMLE preparation resource and buy an average of 11.6 print USMLE titles annually. Due to a paucity of NBDE print and electronic resources, ADA libraries bought significantly fewer print resources, and only 1 subscribed to an electronic resource. The most often reported evaluation methods for both populations were feedback from medical or dental students, feedback from medical or dental faculty, and online trials. Some AAMC (10%, n = 58) and ADA libraries (39%, n = 23) libraries reported that no evaluation of these materials occured at their libraries.

Conclusions

From 2004-2007, publishers produced 45 USMLE preparation resources (total n = 546) to every 1 NBDE preparation resource (total n = 12). Users' needs, institutional missions and goals, financial status, and official collection policies most often underlie decisions to collect or not collect examination preparation materials. Evaluating the quality of examination preparation materials can be problematic due to lack of published reviews, lack of usability testing by libraries, and librarians' and library users' unfamiliarity with the actual content of examinations. Libraries must integrate faculty and students into the purchase process to make sure examination preparation resources of the highest quality are purchased.

SUBMITTER: Hendrix D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2479044 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A survey of collection development for United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) and National Board Dental Examination (NBDE) preparation material.

Hendrix Dean D Hasman Linda L

Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA 20080701 3

<h4>Objective</h4>The research sought to ascertain medical and dental libraries' collection development policies, evaluation methods, purchase decisions, and issues that relate to print and electronic United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) and National Board Dental Examination (NBDE) preparation materials.<h4>Methods</h4>The investigators surveyed librarians supporting American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC)-accredited medical schools (n = 58/125) on the USMLE and librarians ...[more]

PMID: 18654641

Similar Datasets

Project description:Traditional Korean medicine (TKM) emphasizes individualized diagnosis and treatment. This uniqueness makes AI modeling difficult due to limited data and implicit processes. Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive medical inference, even without advanced training in medical texts. This study assessed the capabilities of GPT-4 in TKM, using the Korean National Licensing Examination for Korean Medicine Doctors (K-NLEKMD) as a benchmark. The K-NLEKMD, administered by a national organization, encompasses 12 major subjects in TKM. GPT-4 answered 340 questions from the 2022 K-NLEKMD. We optimized prompts with Chinese-term annotation, English translation for questions and instruction, exam-optimized instruction, and self-consistency. GPT-4 with optimized prompts achieved 66.18% accuracy, surpassing both the examination's average pass mark of 60% and the 40% minimum for each subject. The gradual introduction of language-related prompts and prompting techniques enhanced the accuracy from 51.82% to its maximum accuracy. GPT-4 showed low accuracy in subjects including public health & medicine-related law, internal medicine (2), and acupuncture medicine which are highly localized in Korea and TKM. The model's accuracy was lower for questions requiring TKM-specialized knowledge than those that did not. It exhibited higher accuracy in diagnosis-based and recall-based questions than in intervention-based questions. A significant positive correlation was observed between the consistency and accuracy of GPT-4's responses. This study unveils both the potential and challenges of applying LLMs to TKM. These findings underline the potential of LLMs like GPT-4 in culturally adapted medicine, especially TKM, for tasks such as clinical assistance, medical education, and research. But they also point towards the necessity for the development of methods to mitigate cultural bias inherent in large language models and validate their efficacy in real-world clinical settings.

Dataset Information

A survey of collection development for United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) and National Board Dental Examination (NBDE) preparation material.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A survey of collection development for United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) and National Board Dental Examination (NBDE) preparation material.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets