Comparing and contrasting undergraduate competence in musculoskeletal medicine with cardiovascular medicine and neurology

Computer model for the cardiovascular system: development of an e-learning tool for teaching of medical students

BACKGROUND

This study combined themes in cardiovascular modelling, clinical cardiology and e-learning to create an on-line environment that would assist undergraduate medical students in understanding key physiological and pathophysiological processes in the cardiovascular system.

METHODS

An interactive on-line environment was developed incorporating a lumped-parameter mathematical model of the human cardiovascular system. The model outputs were used to characterise the progression of key disease processes and allowed students to classify disease severity with the aim of improving their understanding of abnormal physiology in a clinical context. Access to the on-line environment was offered to students at all stages of undergraduate training as an adjunct to routine lectures and tutorials in cardiac pathophysiology. Student feedback was collected on this novel on-line material in the course of routine audits of teaching delivery.

RESULTS

Medical students, irrespective of their stage of undergraduate training, reported that they found the models and the environment interesting and a positive experience. After exposure to the environment, there was a statistically significant improvement in student performance on a series of 6 questions based on cardiovascular medicine, with a 33% and 22% increase in the number of questions answered correctly, p < 0.0001 and p < 0.001 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable improvement was found in students' knowledge and understanding during assessment after exposure to the e-learning environment. Opportunities exist for development of similar environments in other fields of medicine, refinement of the existing environment and further engagement with student cohorts. This work combines some exciting and developing fields in medical education, but routine adoption of these types of tool will be possible only with the engagement of all stake-holders, from educationalists, clinicians, modellers to, most importantly, medical students.

Musculoskeletal education in medical school: deficits in knowledge and strategies for improvement

➤ Improvements in medical student physical examination skills and performance on validated musculoskeletal competency examinations correspond with undergraduate curricular reform.➤ Curricular reform success in the United States has been achieved by multidisciplinary collaboration.➤ International efforts are focused on improving medical student physical examination skills through patient partners and structured clinical examinations.➤ Technologies such as simulators and online learning tools are effective and well received.

Survey of the reporting characteristics of systematic reviews in rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews (SRs) have become increasingly important for informing clinical practice; however, little is known about the reporting characteristics and the quality of the SRs relevant to the practice of rehabilitation health professionals.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the reporting quality of a representative sample of published SRs on rehabilitation, focusing on the descriptive, reporting, and bias-related characteristics.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted by searching MEDLINE for aggregative and configurative SRs indexed in 2011 that focused on rehabilitation as restorative of functional limitations. Two reviewers independently screened and selected the SRs and extracted data using a 38-item data collection form derived from Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The data were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight SRs published in 59 journals were sampled. The median compliance with the PRISMA items was 17 (63%) out of 27 items (interquartile ratio=13-22 [48%-82%]). Two thirds of the SRs (n=66) focused on interventions for which efficacy is best addressed through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design, and almost all of these SRs included RCTs (63/66 [95%]). More than two thirds of the SRs assessed the quality of primary studies (74/88 [84%]). Twenty-eight reviews (28/88 [32%]) meta-analyzed the results for at least one outcome. One half of the SRs reported positive statistically significant findings (46%), whereas a detrimental result was present only in one review.

CONCLUSIONS

This sample of SRs in the rehabilitation field showed heterogeneous characteristics and a moderate quality of reporting. Poor control of potential source of bias might be improved if more widely agreed-upon evidence-based reporting guidelines will be actively endorsed and adhered to by authors and journals.