Clerkship sharing on inpatient internal medicine rotations: an emerging clerkship model

Analysis and publication rates of Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine (CDIM) annual meeting abstracts 1995-2005

BACKGROUND

Abstracts presented at meetings may be a reflection of the meeting's quality.

SUMMARY

The goal is to determine purpose, content areas, research design, and subsequent publication rates of abstracts presented at Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine's annual meetings. Abstracts presented in 1995-2005 were analyzed. A total of 201 abstracts were analyzed and coded. The purpose of the majority of the studies was description (155, 77%), 44 (22%) were justification studies, and 2 (1%) were clarification studies. In all, 109 (54%) assessed the relationship between teaching and student performance. Seven (4%) were studies about how students learn, study, solve problems, obtain medical knowledge, and think critically. Nineteen (10%) were studies about students' noncognitive skills, professionalism, interpersonal skills, and well-being studies. In all, 29 (14%) were measurement studies assessing reliability or validity of assessments. Twenty (10%) focused on career or faculty development pertaining to either faculty or residents. Research design of most studies was descriptive or pre-experimental (175, 87%), some were quasi-experimental (13, 7%), and two thirds (135, 66%) were not published as full articles in peer-reviewed journals. and there was an upward trend in publication rates.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings may serve as an indicator of the quality of the educational meeting. It may further stimulate efforts to develop programs to help program attendees achieve scholarly publications for work presented and serve as a benchmark against which future meetings may be judged.

Expectations of and for internal medicine clerkship directors: how are we doing?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine how well published expectations are being met for internal medicine (IM) clerkship directors (CDs).

METHOD

In 2005, the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine (CDIM) surveyed its institutional members. One section addressed expectations, in terms of requirements and resources, of and for CDs. Survey questions were categorical (yes, no, or unsure) addressing the essential responsibilities and resources outlined in the Alliance for Clinical Education (ACE) consensus statement. Descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U, and chi-square testing were used for inferential statistical procedures.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight of 109 institutional members responded to the survey (81% response rate). For each responsibility, more than 90% of respondents reported that they were required to meet the expectation; however, for each of the 8 essential resources, the percentage of respondents who were meeting the expectation varied from 41% for additional time and resources for administering other courses to 95% for sufficient material resources to support clerkship requirements. With the exception of larger institutions having greater access to new technology (p = .038, Mann-Whitney U) and a defined budget (p = .012, Mann-Whitney U), there were no differences in demographics between respondents who did and did not meet expectations or resources.

CONCLUSION

IM CDs reported that they are expected to achieve essential responsibility benchmarks. Essential resources were being met in a variable fashion.