Dataset Information

Assessing Residents' Competency at Baseline: How Much Does the Medical School Matter?

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND :Although there is some consensus about the competencies needed to enter residency, the actual skills of graduating medical students may not meet expectations. In addition, little is known about the association between undergraduate medical education and clinical performance at entry into and during residency. OBJECTIVE :We explored the association between medical school of origin and clinical performance using a multi-station objective structured clinical examination for incoming residents at the University of Michigan Health System. METHODS :Prior to assuming clinical duties, all first-year residents at the University of Michigan Health System participate in the Postgraduate Orientation Assessment (POA). This assesses competencies needed during the first months of residency. Performance data for 1795 residents were collected between 2002 and 2012. We estimated POA variance by medical school using linear mixed models. RESULTS :Medical school predicted the following amounts of variance in performance-data gathering scores: 1.67% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-2.93); assessment scores: 4.93% (95% CI 1.84-6.00); teamwork scores: 0.80% (95% CI 0.00-1.82); communication scores: 2.37% (95% CI 0.66-3.83); and overall POA scores: 4.19% (95% CI 1.59-5.35). CONCLUSIONS :The results show that residents' medical school of origin is weakly associated with clinical competency, highlighting a potential source of variability in undergraduate medical education. The practical significance of these findings needs further evaluation.

SUBMITTER: Gollehon NS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5646921 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSpaced education is a novel method that improves medical education through online repetition of core principles often paired with multiple-choice questions. This model is a proven teaching tool for medical students, but its effect on resident learning is less established. We hypothesized that repetition of key clinical concepts in a "Clinical Pearls" format would improve knowledge retention in medical residents.MethodsThis study investigated spaced education with particular emphasis on using a novel, email-based reinforcement program, and a randomized, self-matched design, in which residents were quizzed on medical knowledge that was either reinforced or not with electronically-administered spaced education. Both reinforced and non-reinforced knowledge was later tested with four quizzes.ResultsOverall, respondents incorrectly answered 395 of 1008 questions (0.39; 95% CI, 0.36-0.42). Incorrect response rates varied by quiz (range 0.34-0.49; p = 0.02), but not significantly by post-graduate year (PGY1 0.44, PGY2 0.33, PGY3 0.38; p = 0.08). Although there was no evidence of benefit among residents (RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.83-1.22; p = 0.95), we observed a significantly lower risk of incorrect responses to reinforced material among interns (RR = 0.83, 95% CI, 0.70-0.99, p = 0.04).ConclusionsOverall, repetition of Clinical Pearls did not statistically improve test scores amongst junior and senior residents. However, among interns, repetition of the Clinical Pearls was associated with significantly higher test scores, perhaps reflecting their greater attendance at didactic sessions and engagement with Clinical Pearls. Although the study was limited by a low response rate, we employed test and control questions within the same quiz, limiting the potential for selection bias. Further work is needed to determine the optimal spacing and content load of Clinical Pearls to maximize retention amongst medical residents. This particular protocol of spaced education, however, was unique and readily reproducible suggesting its potential efficacy for intern education within a large residency program.

Project description:BackgroundVaccination is the most cost-effective medical intervention known to prevent morbidity and mortality. However, data are limited on the effectiveness of residency programs in delivering immunization knowledge and skills to trainees. The authors sought to describe the immunization competency needs of medical residents at the University of Toronto (UT), and to develop and evaluate a pilot immunization curriculum.MethodsResidents at the University of Toronto across nine specialties were recruited to attend a pilot immunization workshop in November 2018. Participants completed a questionnaire before and after the workshop to assess immunization knowledge and compare baseline change. Feedback was also surveyed on the workshop content and process. Descriptive statistics were performed on the knowledge questionnaire and feedback survey. A paired sample T-test compared questionnaire answers before and after the workshop. Descriptive coding was used to identify themes from the feedback survey.ResultsTwenty residents from at least six residencies completed the pre-workshop knowledge questionnaire, seventeen attended the workshop, and thirteen completed the post-workshop questionnaire. Ninety-five percent (19/20) strongly agreed that vaccine knowledge was important to their career, and they preferred case-based teaching. The proportion of the thirty-four knowledge questions answered correctly increased from 49% before the workshop to 67% afterwards, with a mean of 2.24 (CI: 1.43, 3.04) more correct answers (P < 0.001). Sixteen residents completed the post-workshop feedback survey. Three themes emerged: first, they found the content specific and practical; second, they wanted more case-based learning and for the workshop to be longer; and third, they felt the content and presenters were of high quality.ConclusionsFindings from this study suggest current immunization training of UT residents does not meet their training competency requirements. The study's workshop improved participants' immunization knowledge. The information from this study could be used to develop residency immunization curriculum at UT and beyond.

Project description:IntroductionMedical students often do not value attending in-person large group sessions. It is also not clear from prior research whether attendance at large group sessions impact on performance in medical school. The goal of this study was to assess the relationship between voluntary attendance in large group sessions organized as a "flipped classroom" in a new innovative curriculum and students' mastery of clinical applications of basic science knowledge.MethodologyOur students' ability to apply basic science knowledge to clinical problems is assessed via progress testing using three methodologies: a locally developed multiple-choice examination, written examination developed through the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Customized Assessment Services Program and post encounter questions included in a clinical skills examination. We analyzed the relationship between voluntary attendance at weekly large group "flipped classroom" sessions and the students' performance on examinations given at four intervals over the initial 24-week module of the medical school curriculum.ResultsComplete data were available for 167 students. A total of 82 students (49.1%) attended all large group sessions, 65 students (38.9%) missed one or two sessions and 20 students (12.0%) missed three or more sessions. There were no difference between the students in the groups on their medical admission (MCAT) examination scores. The growth in performance from each time point until the next was statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference in growth between the students who had no absences and those who had one or two absences. Students who missed three or more sessions performed significantly lower than their peers over the 24 week module and were more likely to score one or more standard deviations below the class mean on the assessments.ConclusionsWe found no relationship between attendance and MCAT scores suggesting the differences in performance on the progress tests was not due to initial differences in knowledge or reasoning skills. While the study was not experimental, it suggests large group sessions using a "flipped classroom" approach to provide reinforcement, feedback and practice may be effective for increasing learning and retention in the application of basic science knowledge among first year medical students.

Dataset Information

Assessing Residents' Competency at Baseline: How Much Does the Medical School Matter?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets