Dataset Information

A standardized online clinical education and assessment tool for neurology clerkship students assigned to multiple sites.

ABSTRACT: The Drexel neurology clerkship experience can vary from large groups at a university hospital inpatient unit to smaller groups at private physician offices. Evaluations are based on the site director's subjective assessment and performance on the National Board of Medical Examiners neurology shelf examination. We are developing a standardized online clinical neurology course and quiz for the whole clerkship. We piloted the course and quiz at a single site for one academic year and compared their test scores with a control group of students at other clerkship sites who took the online quiz without viewing the course. Students at the pilot site achieved higher scores both on the neurology shelf examination and the clinical quiz and also reported higher teaching satisfaction scores than students at all other sites. There was a 97 % participation rate in the online quiz from the other sites. Use of this online course and quiz provides effective standardized clinical neurology teaching and evaluation that can be applied to students across multiple sites.

SUBMITTER: Holland NR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3889993 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A standardized online clinical education and assessment tool for neurology clerkship students assigned to multiple sites.

Holland Neil R NR Grinberg Ilya I Tabby David D

Perspectives on medical education 20140101 1

The Drexel neurology clerkship experience can vary from large groups at a university hospital inpatient unit to smaller groups at private physician offices. Evaluations are based on the site director's subjective assessment and performance on the National Board of Medical Examiners neurology shelf examination. We are developing a standardized online clinical neurology course and quiz for the whole clerkship. We piloted the course and quiz at a single site for one academic year and compared their ...[more]

PMID: 24307398

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionA disconnect appears to exist for medical students between learning drug facts in a basic science context and applying those facts in a clinical context when they begin working with authentic patients. In patients with kidney dysfunction, dosages of medications that are renally eliminated often need to be adjusted, due to potentially toxic accumulation in the body. To gain insight into the thought processes and gaps underlying student thinking, we developed this standardized patient (SP) case featuring a patient with drug-related renal dysfunction.MethodsThis activity was conducted in a simulation center, in a setting reminiscent of an emergency department. It took place over 2 days, with all 23 third-year medical students at our regional campus. After reporting to the simulation center at their assigned time, students completed four different medication scenarios. This specific case involved two parts. The first part, an SP-student encounter, was allotted 15 minutes, followed by 1 minute to walk to a computer station. For the second part, writing a SOAP (subjective, objective, assessment, and plan) note, 15 minutes were allotted. This was followed by 3 minutes for the SP to provide student feedback and 1 minute to rotate to the next station. In total, 35 minutes were allotted for each student to complete the case.ResultsAll third-year medical students at our regional campus completed this activity at the midpoint of their academic year. Students were well prepared to gather necessary background information from the standardized patient. However, few made the connection between the patient's symptoms and the way in which her medications were contributing. Nor did they recommend an appropriate course of action for medications that required adjustment.DiscussionFrom this activity, we gained insight into the student thought process with regard to medication management and have been able to develop new ways of revisiting basic science concepts in clinically relevant contexts to help bridge the gap between the basic and clinical components of pharmacology education.

Project description:ObjectivesIn 2016, a national consensus conference created the National Clinical Assessment Tool for Medical Students in Emergency Medicine (NCAT-EM), a standardized end-of-shift assessment tool. We report the first large-scale analysis of professionalism concerns collected from May 2017 through December 2018 by a multisite consortium using the NCAT-EM. Our primary objective was to characterize the nature and frequency of professionalism concerns. Our secondary objective was to identify characteristics associated with giving or receiving a professionalism flag.MethodsThe consortium database includes assessments for all students on EM clerkships at participating sites. This report presents descriptive statistics about the frequency of different flags, the distribution of flags among different student categories, assessor and student characteristics, and distribution of global assessment scores on assessments citing concerns. We used Fisher's exact test to look for associations between the frequency of professionalism flags and the sex of the students and assessors and across student categories. We used logistic regression to look for relationships between professionalism concerns and global assessment scores as well as intent to apply in EM.ResultsWe screened 6,768 assessments of 784 students by 719 assessors from 13 sites. After excluding assessments without flags and assessments with apparent data entry errors, we analyzed 57 (0.8%) assessments containing 79 flags. The most frequent flags were punctuality (25/79, 31.6%) and initiative (20/79, 25.3%). Few students received flags (42/784, 5.4%). Few assessors flagged concerns (41/719, 5.7%). We detected no correlation between the frequency of flags and whether a student was applying in EM or between the sex of students and assessors. Global scores of lower one-third appeared more often in assessments with a flag (30/57, 52.6% vs. 233/6,711, 3.5%).ConclusionsOnly 5.4% of students received flags. Punctuality and initiative accounted for a majority of citations. Professionalism flags correlated strongly with lower global assessment scores.

Project description:In self-directed learning environments, students must monitor and assess their learning progress themselves. Formative assessments play a central role as instructional tools to train students in these self-assessment skills. Key to the effectiveness of a formative assessment as a training instrument is the degree of student involvement in the design and implementation of the formative assessment used to train them. Five characteristics are essential to secure a sufficient level of student involvement: (1) congruence (i.e., the tasks of a formative assessment must reflect the instructional content), (2) authenticity (i.e., the tasks of a formative assessment should be related to students' background and study context), (3) consultation (i.e., students should have a say in how their answers are evaluated based on which criteria), (4) transparency (i.e., no "mystery items"-the wording of the items must clearly addresses the targeted content), and (5) accommodation (i.e., all students should have the same chance to complete the items of a formative assessment). These five characteristics of student involvement were used to evaluate the quality of formative assessments that are employed to train undergraduates in a medical school in self-assessment skills. Different from extant approaches that typically rely on instructors' judgments to infer the degree of student involvement, this study uses a paradigm in higher educational research asking students directly about their perceptions of an instructional tool. Thus, here, students had to rate their level of involvement in the design and implementation of the formative assessments used to train them. A total of 140 medical students participated in the study. Multivariate statistical methods were used to analyze the data. The majority of medical students appreciate the use of formative assessments to teach them self-directed learning skills; but the results also show that there is still room for increasing student involvement-especially, for minority students.

Dataset Information

A standardized online clinical education and assessment tool for neurology clerkship students assigned to multiple sites.

Publications

A standardized online clinical education and assessment tool for neurology clerkship students assigned to multiple sites.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets