Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25884843›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2015

The status of evolutionary medicine education in North American medical schools.

Brandon H Hidaka, Anila Asghar, C Athena Aktipis, Randolph M Nesse, Terry M Wolpaw, Nicole K Skursky, Katelyn J Bennett, Matthew W Beyrouty, Mark D Schwartz

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Evolutionary psychiatry: foundations, progress and challenges.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. (Re-) Defining evolutionary medicine.Ecology and evolution · 2020
    Article
  5. Review
  6. The state of evolutionary medicine in undergraduate education.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2019
    Article
  7. Core principles of evolutionary medicine: A Delphi study.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2018
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Brandon H HidakaUniversity of Kansas Medical Center, 3901 W Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA. bhidaka@kumc.edu.
Anila AsgharMcGill University, 3700 McTavish Street, Room 244, Montréal, Québec, H3A 1Y2, Canada. anila.asghar@mcgill.ca.
C Athena AktipisArizona State University, 411 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA. aktipis@asu.edu.
Randolph M NesseArizona State University, 411 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA. nesse@asu.edu.
Terry M WolpawPenn State College of Medicine, 500 University Drive, Hershey, PA, 17033, USA. twolpaw@hmc.psu.edu.
Nicole K SkurskyNew York University School of Medicine, 550 1st Ave, New York, NY, 10016, USA. Nicole.skursky@nyumc.org.
Katelyn J BennettNew York University School of Medicine, 550 1st Ave, New York, NY, 10016, USA. katelyn.bennett@va.gov.
Matthew W BeyroutyNew York University School of Medicine, 550 1st Ave, New York, NY, 10016, USA. matthew.beyrouty@va.gov.
Mark D SchwartzNew York University School of Medicine, 550 1st Ave, New York, NY, 10016, USA. mark.schwartz@nyumc.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical and public health scientists are using evolution to devise new strategies to solve major health problems. But based on a 2003 survey, medical curricula may not adequately prepare physicians to evaluate and extend these advances. This study assessed the change in coverage of evolution in North American medical schools since 2003 and identified opportunities for enriching medical education.

methodsIn 2013, curriculum deans for all North American medical schools were invited to rate curricular coverage and perceived importance of 12 core principles, the extent of anticipated controversy from adding evolution, and the usefulness of 13 teaching resources. Differences between schools were assessed by Pearson's chi-square test, Student's t-test, and Spearman's correlation. Open-ended questions sought insight into perceived barriers and benefits.

resultsDespite repeated follow-up, 60 schools (39%) responded to the survey. There was no evidence of sample bias. The three evolutionary principles rated most important were antibiotic resistance, environmental mismatch, and somatic selection in cancer. While importance and coverage of principles were correlated (r = 0.76, P < 0.01), coverage (at least moderate) lagged behind importance (at least moderate) by an average of 21% (SD = 6%). Compared to 2003, a range of evolutionary principles were covered by 4 to 74% more schools. Nearly half (48%) of responders anticipated igniting controversy at their medical school if they added evolution to their curriculum. The teaching resources ranked most useful were model test questions and answers, case studies, and model curricula for existing courses/rotations. Limited resources (faculty expertise) were cited as the major barrier to adding more evolution, but benefits included a deeper understanding and improved patient care.

conclusionNorth American medical schools have increased the evolution content in their curricula over the past decade. However, coverage is not commensurate with importance. At a few medical schools, anticipated controversy impedes teaching more evolution. Efforts to improve evolution education in medical schools should be directed toward boosting faculty expertise and crafting resources that can be easily integrated into existing curricula.

Indexed as

Educational MeasurementChi-Square DistributionCurriculumEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFaculty, MedicalFemaleForecastingHumansMaleMedicineNeeds AssessmentNorth AmericaSchools, MedicalSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID25884843
PMCPMC4355969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.