Limits...
Using the Progress Test Medizin (PTM) for evaluation of the Medical Curriculum Munich (MeCuM).

Schmidmaier R, Holzer M, Angstwurm M, Nouns Z, Reincke M, Fischer MR - GMS Z Med Ausbild (2010)

Bottom Line: However, significant differences between the sub-disciplines of internal medicine could be observed.Interestingly, practical experiences like clinical clerkships positively influenced the test score.The PTM is a useful tool for the evaluation of knowledge retention in a specific curriculum.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Klinikum der Universität München, Medizinische Klinik Innenstadt, Schwerpunkt Medizindidaktik, München, Deutschland.

ABSTRACT

Aims: The Medical Curriculum Munich (MeCuM) has been implemented since 2004 and was completely established in 2007. In this study the clinical part of MeCuM was evaluated with respect to retention of the knowledge in internal medicine (learning objectives of the 6th/7th semester).

Methods: In summer of 2009 and winter of 2009/2010 1065 students participated in the Progress Test Medizin (PTM) from Charité Medical School Berlin. Additionally the students answered a questionnaire regarding the acceptance and rating of the progress test and basic demographic data.

Results: The knowledge of internal medicine continuously increases during the clinical part of the medical curriculum in Munich. However, significant differences between the sub-disciplines of internal medicine could be observed. The overall acceptance of the PTM was high and increased further with the study progress. Interestingly, practical experiences like clinical clerkships positively influenced the test score.

Conclusions: The PTM is a useful tool for the evaluation of knowledge retention in a specific curriculum.

No MeSH data available.


Knowledge growth in sub-disciplines of internal medicine in the MeCuMY-axis: Share (correct-wrong) questions in the listed sub-disciplines. X-axis: Measurement points (see Figure 1 for definition).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3140378&req=5

Figure 5: Knowledge growth in sub-disciplines of internal medicine in the MeCuMY-axis: Share (correct-wrong) questions in the listed sub-disciplines. X-axis: Measurement points (see Figure 1 for definition).

Mentions: Figure 2 (Fig. 2) shows that the knowledge of “Conservative Medicine” (Module 2) increases in Module 2 and 3 (T2 versus T1 comparison) but contrary to initial expectations, continues to increase in the subsequent course of study until the beginning of the Practical Year (T3). The results of the 2009 summer semester and the 09/10 winter semester were pooled and the result is shown as a percentage of points achieved. The number of questions about “Conservative Medicine” and therefore the absolute number of achievable points are different in each semester. Figure 3 (Fig. 3) shows that in respect to Module 3, a significant increase in knowledge of “Conservative Medicine” occurs (A vs. B). After completion of both modules, the results return to an identical level (C, D) and continue to increase up until T3 (E/F) although this increase is not statistically significant. The learning targets in Module 2 “Conservative Medicine” are divided in the various sub-specialisations of internal medicine. It was therefore also investigated whether there are differences in the knowledge gain between these specialisations. Figure 4 (Fig. 4) shows that subjects with higher knowledge growth (for example cardiology and rheumatology) can be distinguished from subjects in which knowledge regarding specific learning targets tested in the Progress Test is virtually unchanged (for example infectious diseases and nephrology). Further analysis shows (see Figure 5 (Fig. 5)) that prior knowledge from the preclinical stage of studies and Module 1 “Clinical Basics” is low internal medicine with respect to the specific learning targets. Cardiology aside, only endocrinology, oncology and pneumology show comparably high initial levels. Regardless of this prior knowledge, there is a marked increase in knowledge in Module 2 in disciplines such as cardiology or rheumatology. These show virtually no further increase in the further course of studies. On the other hand, students make up for their lack of knowledge in nephrology and infectious diseases as their studies progress. Here the significant growth occurs only after completion of Module 2. In an interdisciplinary subject such as infectious diseases, this is can be easily understood.


Using the Progress Test Medizin (PTM) for evaluation of the Medical Curriculum Munich (MeCuM).

Schmidmaier R, Holzer M, Angstwurm M, Nouns Z, Reincke M, Fischer MR - GMS Z Med Ausbild (2010)

Knowledge growth in sub-disciplines of internal medicine in the MeCuMY-axis: Share (correct-wrong) questions in the listed sub-disciplines. X-axis: Measurement points (see Figure 1 for definition).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3140378&req=5

Figure 5: Knowledge growth in sub-disciplines of internal medicine in the MeCuMY-axis: Share (correct-wrong) questions in the listed sub-disciplines. X-axis: Measurement points (see Figure 1 for definition).
Mentions: Figure 2 (Fig. 2) shows that the knowledge of “Conservative Medicine” (Module 2) increases in Module 2 and 3 (T2 versus T1 comparison) but contrary to initial expectations, continues to increase in the subsequent course of study until the beginning of the Practical Year (T3). The results of the 2009 summer semester and the 09/10 winter semester were pooled and the result is shown as a percentage of points achieved. The number of questions about “Conservative Medicine” and therefore the absolute number of achievable points are different in each semester. Figure 3 (Fig. 3) shows that in respect to Module 3, a significant increase in knowledge of “Conservative Medicine” occurs (A vs. B). After completion of both modules, the results return to an identical level (C, D) and continue to increase up until T3 (E/F) although this increase is not statistically significant. The learning targets in Module 2 “Conservative Medicine” are divided in the various sub-specialisations of internal medicine. It was therefore also investigated whether there are differences in the knowledge gain between these specialisations. Figure 4 (Fig. 4) shows that subjects with higher knowledge growth (for example cardiology and rheumatology) can be distinguished from subjects in which knowledge regarding specific learning targets tested in the Progress Test is virtually unchanged (for example infectious diseases and nephrology). Further analysis shows (see Figure 5 (Fig. 5)) that prior knowledge from the preclinical stage of studies and Module 1 “Clinical Basics” is low internal medicine with respect to the specific learning targets. Cardiology aside, only endocrinology, oncology and pneumology show comparably high initial levels. Regardless of this prior knowledge, there is a marked increase in knowledge in Module 2 in disciplines such as cardiology or rheumatology. These show virtually no further increase in the further course of studies. On the other hand, students make up for their lack of knowledge in nephrology and infectious diseases as their studies progress. Here the significant growth occurs only after completion of Module 2. In an interdisciplinary subject such as infectious diseases, this is can be easily understood.

Bottom Line: However, significant differences between the sub-disciplines of internal medicine could be observed.Interestingly, practical experiences like clinical clerkships positively influenced the test score.The PTM is a useful tool for the evaluation of knowledge retention in a specific curriculum.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Klinikum der Universität München, Medizinische Klinik Innenstadt, Schwerpunkt Medizindidaktik, München, Deutschland.

ABSTRACT

Aims: The Medical Curriculum Munich (MeCuM) has been implemented since 2004 and was completely established in 2007. In this study the clinical part of MeCuM was evaluated with respect to retention of the knowledge in internal medicine (learning objectives of the 6th/7th semester).

Methods: In summer of 2009 and winter of 2009/2010 1065 students participated in the Progress Test Medizin (PTM) from Charité Medical School Berlin. Additionally the students answered a questionnaire regarding the acceptance and rating of the progress test and basic demographic data.

Results: The knowledge of internal medicine continuously increases during the clinical part of the medical curriculum in Munich. However, significant differences between the sub-disciplines of internal medicine could be observed. The overall acceptance of the PTM was high and increased further with the study progress. Interestingly, practical experiences like clinical clerkships positively influenced the test score.

Conclusions: The PTM is a useful tool for the evaluation of knowledge retention in a specific curriculum.

No MeSH data available.