Dataset Information

Relative progress and academic performance of graduate vs undergraduate entrants to an Australian medical school.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Whether graduate entrants to medical school perform better academically than undergraduate entrants remains controversial. Differences in the discipline backgrounds of graduates may, at least in part, have accounted for differences in the results of comparative studies reported to date. This study aimed to address the dual issues of whether academic performance and progression rates were different between GE and UG students and the extent to which the discipline background of GE students may underpin any differences observed. METHODS:Relative academic performance as well as indicators of student progression (supplementary examinations, repeat years, leave of absence, withdrawal from the programme) were compared between graduate entrants (GE) (N?=?410) and both school leaver entrants (SLE) (N?=?865) and non-standard entrants (some prior tertiary education) (NSE) (N?=?148) who combined for the final 4?yr. of a 6?yr. MBBS undergraduate programme in 8 consecutive cohorts from 2006 to 2013 in Western Australia. RESULTS:Examination scores were generally at or very close to a distinction grade or higher across all groups. Higher mean examination scores were seen for GE versus both SLE and NSE in the first 2?years with no significant differences in the final 2?years. GE from biological science / science backgrounds (N?=?241) or physical science backgrounds (N?=?26) performed the same as SLE and NSE throughout the programme. GE with a health / allied health background (N?=?91), however, performed better throughout. They also performed better when compared to their GE counterparts from a humanities (N?=?32) or a biological science / science background. GE had increased odds of withdrawing when compared to SLE (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.30, 4.79, P?=?0.006), but not compared to NSE. NSE had increased odds of repeating at least one level when compared to either GE (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.21, 6.21, P?=?0.016) or SLE (OR 4.10, 95% CI 1.93, 8.70, P?

SUBMITTER: Puddey IB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6530006 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Relative progress and academic performance of graduate vs undergraduate entrants to an Australian medical school.

Puddey Ian B IB Mercer Annette A Carr Sandra E SE

BMC medical education 20190522 1

<h4>Background</h4>Whether graduate entrants to medical school perform better academically than undergraduate entrants remains controversial. Differences in the discipline backgrounds of graduates may, at least in part, have accounted for differences in the results of comparative studies reported to date. This study aimed to address the dual issues of whether academic performance and progression rates were different between GE and UG students and the extent to which the discipline background of ...[more]

PMID: 31113431

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Psychological distress in medical students is a global issue and poses a risk to their health, academic performance, and ability to care for patients as clinicians. There has been limited research on psychological distress levels in students prior to starting medicine and no direct comparison between undergraduate and graduate-entry students. METHODS:Psychological distress was assessed using the 21-item Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale in 168 undergraduate-entry and 84 graduate-entry medical students at two separated campuses of the same university in the orientation week prior to starting classes. Mean scores and severity proportions were compared between the two cohorts of students. Demographic data was also collected and compared to distress scores using subgroup analysis. RESULTS:The response rate for the study was 60.9%. The majority of undergraduate and graduate-entry medical students were within the normal limits for depression (67.2% versus 70.2%, p = 0.63), anxiety (56.5% versus 44.0%, p = 0.06), and stress scores (74.4% versus 64.2%, p = 0.10). There was no significant difference between severity groups except for severe stress (2.3% versus 9.5%, p = 0.01). The mean scores of the clinically distressed groups indicated moderate levels of depression, moderate anxiety, and moderate stress scores. There were no significant differences between undergraduate or graduate-entry students for depressive ([Formula: see text] = 17.02 versus 15.76, p = 0.43), anxiety ([Formula: see text] = 14.22 versus 13.28, p = 0.39), and stress scores ([Formula: see text] = 20.83 versus 22.46, p = 0.24). Female gender and self-believed financial concerns were found be associated with higher levels stress in graduate entry students. CONCLUSIONS:The majority of medical students enter medical school with normal levels of psychological distress. However, a large number of undergraduate and graduate-entry medical students have significant levels of depressive, anxiety, and stress levels, without a significant difference between undergraduate or graduate-entry students. There are several limitation of this study but the results suggest that education and intervention may be required to support students from the earliest weeks of medical school.

Project description:BackgroundMedical educators struggle to incorporate socio-cultural topics into crowded curricula. The "continuum of learning" includes undergraduate and graduate medical education. Utilizing an exemplar socio-cultural topic, we studied the feasibility of achieving expert consensus among two groups of faculty (experts in medical education and experts in social determinants of health) on which aspects of the topic could be taught during undergraduate versus graduate medical education.MethodsA modified Delphi method was used to generate expert consensus on which learning objectives of social determinants of health are best taught at each stage of medical education. Delphi respondents included experts in medical education or social determinants of health. A survey was created using nationally published criteria for social determinants of health learning objectives. Respondents were asked 1) which learning objectives were necessary for every physician (irrespective of specialty) to develop competence upon completion of medical training and 2) when the learning objective should be taught. Respondents were also asked an open-ended question on how they made the determination of when in the medical education continuum the learning objective should be taught.Results26 out of 55 experts (13 social determinants of health and 13 education experts) responded to all 3 Delphi rounds. Experts evaluated a total of 49 learning objectives and were able to achieve consensus for at least one of the two research questions for 45 of 49 (92%) learning objectives. 50% more learning objectives reached consensus for inclusion in undergraduate (n = 21) versus graduate medical education (n = 14).ConclusionsA modified Delphi technique demonstrated that experts could identify key learning objectives of social determinants of health needed by all physicians and allocate content along the undergraduate and graduate medical education continuum. This approach could serve as a model for similar socio-cultural content. Future work should employ a qualitative approach to capture principles utilized by experts when making these decisions.

Project description:Defining professionalism in this constantly evolving world is not easy. How do you measure degrees of benevolence and compassion? If it is so obvious to our profession, what professionalism is, then why is it so difficult to teach it to medical students and residents? Today's definition of medical professionalism is evolving - from autonomy to accountability, from expert opinion to evidence-based medicine, and from self-interest to teamwork and shared responsibility. However, medical professionalism is defined as the basis for the trust in the patient-physician relationship, caring and compassion, insight, openness, respect for patient dignity, confidentiality, autonomy, presence, altruism, and those qualities that lead to trust-competence, integrity, honesty, morality, and ethical conduct. The purpose of this study is to explore professionalism in terms of its fundamental elements among medical students of Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin (UniSZA). This was a cross-sectional study carried out on medical students of UniSZA. The study population included preclinical and clinical medical students of UniSZA from Year I to Year V of academic session 2014/2015. The simple random sampling technique was used to select the sample. Data were collected using a validated instrument. The data were then compiled and analyzed using SPSS Version 21. Out of 165 questionnaires distributed randomly among Year I to Year V medical students of UniSZA, 144 returned, giving a response rate of 87%. Among the study participants, 38% (54) and 62% (90) were males and females, respectively. The grand total score was 170.92±19.08. A total of 166.98±20.15 and 173.49±18.09 were the total professionalism score of male and female study participants, respectively, with no statistically significant (P=0.61) differences. This study found almost similar levels of familiarity with all fundamental issues of professionalism with no statistically (P>0.05) significant differences. Medical faculty members should give more effort for the professional development of medical doctor. Henceforth, researchers believe and expect that the country will produce more rational and holistic medical doctors.

Dataset Information

Relative progress and academic performance of graduate vs undergraduate entrants to an Australian medical school.

Publications

Relative progress and academic performance of graduate vs undergraduate entrants to an Australian medical school.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets