Dataset Information

The Analysis of Teaching of Medical Schools (AToMS) survey: an analysis of 47,258 timetabled teaching events in 25 UK medical schools relating to timing, duration, teaching formats, teaching content, and problem-based learning.

ABSTRACT:

Background

What subjects UK medical schools teach, what ways they teach subjects, and how much they teach those subjects is unclear. Whether teaching differences matter is a separate, important question. This study provides a detailed picture of timetabled undergraduate teaching activity at 25 UK medical schools, particularly in relation to problem-based learning (PBL).

Method

The Analysis of Teaching of Medical Schools (AToMS) survey used detailed timetables provided by 25 schools with standard 5-year courses. Timetabled teaching events were coded in terms of course year, duration, teaching format, and teaching content. Ten schools used PBL. Teaching times from timetables were validated against two other studies that had assessed GP teaching and lecture, seminar, and tutorial times.

Results

A total of 47,258 timetabled teaching events in the academic year 2014/2015 were analysed, including SSCs (student-selected components) and elective studies. A typical UK medical student receives 3960 timetabled hours of teaching during their 5-year course. There was a clear difference between the initial 2 years which mostly contained basic medical science content and the later 3 years which mostly consisted of clinical teaching, although some clinical teaching occurs in the first 2 years. Medical schools differed in duration, format, and content of teaching. Two main factors underlay most of the variation between schools, Traditional vs PBL teaching and Structured vs Unstructured teaching. A curriculum map comparing medical schools was constructed using those factors. PBL schools differed on a number of measures, having more PBL teaching time, fewer lectures, more GP teaching, less surgery, less formal teaching of basic science, and more sessions with unspecified content.

Discussion

UK medical schools differ in both format and content of teaching. PBL and non-PBL schools clearly differ, albeit with substantial variation within groups, and overlap in the middle. The important question of whether differences in teaching matter in terms of outcomes is analysed in a companion study (MedDifs) which examines how teaching differences relate to university infrastructure, entry requirements, student perceptions, and outcomes in Foundation Programme and postgraduate training.

SUBMITTER: Devine OP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7222546 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Analysis of Teaching of Medical Schools (AToMS) survey: an analysis of 47,258 timetabled teaching events in 25 UK medical schools relating to timing, duration, teaching formats, teaching content, and problem-based learning.

Devine Oliver Patrick OP Harborne Andrew Christopher AC Horsfall Hugo Layard HL Joseph Tobin T Marshall-Andon Tess T Samuels Ryan R Kearsley Joshua William JW Abbas Nadine N Baig Hassan H Beecham Joseph J Benons Natasha N Caird Charlie C Clark Ryan R Cope Thomas T Coultas James J Debenham Luke L Douglas Sarah S Eldridge Jack J Hughes-Gooding Thomas T Jakubowska Agnieszka A Jones Oliver O Lancaster Eve E MacMillan Calum C McAllister Ross R Merzougui Wassim W Phillips Ben B Phillips Simon S Risk Omar O Sage Adam A Sooltangos Aisha A Spencer Robert R Tajbakhsh Roxanne R Adesalu Oluseyi O Aganin Ivan I Ahmed Ammar A Aiken Katherine K Akeredolu Alimatu-Sadia AS Alam Ibrahim I Ali Aamna A Anderson Richard R Ang Jia Jun JJ Anis Fady Sameh FS Aojula Sonam S Arthur Catherine C Ashby Alena A Ashraf Ahmed A Aspinall Emma E Awad Mark M Yahaya Abdul-Muiz Azri AA Badhrinarayanan Shreya S Bandyopadhyay Soham S Barnes Sam S Bassey-Duke Daisy D Boreham Charlotte C Braine Rebecca R Brandreth Joseph J Carrington Zoe Z Cashin Zoe Z Chatterjee Shaunak S Chawla Mehar M Chean Chung Shen CS Clements Chris C Clough Richard R Coulthurst Jessica J Curry Liam L Daniels Vinnie Christine VC Davies Simon S Davis Rebecca R De Waal Hanelie H Desai Nasreen N Douglas Hannah H Druce James J Ejamike Lady-Namera LN Esere Meron M Eyre Alex A Fazmin Ibrahim Talal IT Fitzgerald-Smith Sophia S Ford Verity V Freeston Sarah S Garnett Katherine K General Whitney W Gilbert Helen H Gowie Zein Z Grafton-Clarke Ciaran C Gudka Keshni K Gumber Leher L Gupta Rishi R Harlow Chris C Harrington Amy A Heaney Adele A Ho Wing Hang Serene WHS Holloway Lucy L Hood Christina C Houghton Eleanor E Houshangi Saba S Howard Emma E Human Benjamin B Hunter Harriet H Hussain Ifrah I Hussain Sami S Jackson-Taylor Richard Thomas RT Jacob-Ramsdale Bronwen B Janjuha Ryan R Jawad Saleh S Jelani Muzzamil M Johnston David D Jones Mike M Kalidindi Sadhana S Kalsi Savraj S Kalyanasundaram Asanish A Kane Anna A Kaur Sahaj S Al-Othman Othman Khaled OK Khan Qaisar Q Khullar Sajan S Kirkland Priscilla P Lawrence-Smith Hannah H Leeson Charlotte C Lenaerts Julius Elisabeth Richard JER Long Kerry K Lubbock Simon S Burrell Jamie Mac Donald JMD Maguire Rachel R Mahendran Praveen P Majeed Saad S Malhotra Prabhjot Singh PS Mandagere Vinay V Mantelakis Angelos A McGovern Sophie S Mosuro Anjola A Moxley Adam A Mustoe Sophie S Myers Sam S Nadeem Kiran K Nasseri Reza R Newman Tom T Nzewi Richard R Ogborne Rosalie R Omatseye Joyce J Paddock Sophie S Parkin James J Patel Mohit M Pawar Sohini S Pearce Stuart S Penrice Samuel S Purdy Julian J Ramjan Raisa R Randhawa Ratan R Rasul Usman U Raymond-Taggert Elliot E Razey Rebecca R Razzaghi Carmel C Reel Eimear E Revell Elliot John EJ Rigbye Joanna J Rotimi Oloruntobi O Said Abdelrahman A Sanders Emma E Sangal Pranoy P Grandal Nora Sangvik NS Shah Aadam A Shah Rahul Atul RA Shotton Oliver O Sims Daniel D Sims Daniel D Smart Katie K Smith Martha Amy MA Smith Nick N Sopian Aninditya Salma AS South Matthew M Speller Jessica J Syer Tom J TJ Ta Ngan Hong NH Tadross Daniel D Thompson Benjamin B Trevett Jess J Tyler Matthew M Ullah Roshan R Utukuri Mrudula M Vadera Shree S Van Den Tooren Harriet H Venturini Sara S Vijayakumar Aradhya A Vine Melanie M Wellbelove Zoe Z Wittner Liora L Yong Geoffrey Hong Kiat GHK Ziyada Farris F McManus I C IC

BMC medicine 20200514 1

<h4>Background</h4>What subjects UK medical schools teach, what ways they teach subjects, and how much they teach those subjects is unclear. Whether teaching differences matter is a separate, important question. This study provides a detailed picture of timetabled undergraduate teaching activity at 25 UK medical schools, particularly in relation to problem-based learning (PBL).<h4>Method</h4>The Analysis of Teaching of Medical Schools (AToMS) survey used detailed timetables provided by 25 school ...[more]

PMID: 32404194

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the current provision and outcome of community-based education (CBE) in UK medical schools.Design and data sourcesAn online survey of UK medical school websites and course prospectuses and a systematic review of articles from PubMed and Web of Science were conducted. Articles in the systematic review were assessed using Rossi, Lipsey and Freeman's approach to programme evaluation.Study selectionPublications from November 1998 to 2013 containing information related to community teaching in undergraduate medical courses were included.ResultsOut of the 32 undergraduate UK medical schools, one was excluded due to the lack of course specifications available online. Analysis of the remaining 31 medical schools showed that a variety of CBE models are utilised in medical schools across the UK. Twenty-eight medical schools (90.3%) provide CBE in some form by the end of the first year of undergraduate training, and 29 medical schools (93.5%) by the end of the second year. From the 1378 references identified, 29 papers met the inclusion criteria for assessment. It was found that CBE mostly provided advantages to students as well as other participants, including GP tutors and patients. However, there were a few concerns regarding the lack of GP tutors' knowledge in specialty areas, the negative impact that CBE may have on the delivery of health service in education settings and the cost of CBE.ConclusionsDespite the wide variations in implementation, community teaching was found to be mostly beneficial. To ensure the relevance of CBE for 'Tomorrow's Doctors', a national framework should be established, and solutions sought to reduce the impact of the challenges within CBE.Strengths and limitations of this studyThis is the first study to review how community-based education is currently provided throughout Medical Schools in the UK. The use of Rossi, Lipsey and Freeman's method of programme evaluation means that the literature was analysed in a consistent and comprehensive way. However, a weakness is that data from the online survey was obtained from online medical school prospectuses. This means the data may be incomplete or out of date. Data in the literature review may also be skewed by publication bias.

Project description:BACKGROUND:People with intellectual disability (ID) have multiple and complex health needs, more frequent healthcare episodes, and experience poorer health outcomes. Research conducted two decades ago showed that medical professionals were lacking in the knowledge and skills required to address the complex needs of this patient group. The aim of the current study was to determine whether Australian undergraduate medical schools that offer ID health education content had changed the amount and nature of such teaching over this period. METHODS:Identical or equivalent questionnaire items were compared across eight Australian medical schools that participated in curricula audits conducted in 1995 (referred to as T1) and 2013/14 (T2). The audits were of the nature of the ID content, methods used to teach it, and who taught it. RESULTS:There was no significant difference in the number of hours of compulsory ID content offered to medical students at T2 (total?=?158.3?h; median?=?2.8?h per ID unit) compared with T1 (total?=?171?h; median?=?2.5?h). At T2 compared with T1, units with ID content taught in the area of general practice had increased (2?units; 3.6% to 7?units; 16.3%), while decreases were seen in paediatrics (22?units; 40.0% to 10?units; 23.3%) and psychiatry (10?units; 18.2% to 4?units; 9.3%). The number of schools using problem- and/or enquiry-based learning rose to six at T2 from one at T1. Inclusive teaching practices (people with ID develop or deliver content) in compulsory/elective units had increased at T2 (10?units; 23.3%) compared with T1 (6?units; 10.9%), but direct clinical contact with people with ID had decreased (29?units; 52.7% to 11?units; 25.6%). CONCLUSIONS:Overall, little progress has been made to address the gaps in ID education for medical students identified from an audit conducted in 1995. Renewal of ID content in medical curricula is indicated as a key element in efforts to improve workforce capacity in this area and reduce barriers to care, with the aim of reversing the poor health outcomes currently seen for this group.

Dataset Information

The Analysis of Teaching of Medical Schools (AToMS) survey: an analysis of 47,258 timetabled teaching events in 25 UK medical schools relating to timing, duration, teaching formats, teaching content, and problem-based learning.

Background

Method

Results

Discussion

Publications

The Analysis of Teaching of Medical Schools (AToMS) survey: an analysis of 47,258 timetabled teaching events in 25 UK medical schools relating to timing, duration, teaching formats, teaching content, and problem-based learning.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure