ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2018
Time-variable medical education innovation in context.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Putting students at the center: moving beyond time-variable one-size-fits-all medical education to true individualization.Advances in medical education and practice · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical education is undergoing robust curricular reform with several innovative models emerging. In this study, we examined current trends in 3-year Doctor of Medicine (MD) education and place these programs in context.
methodsA survey was conducted among Deans of U.S. allopathic medical schools using structured phone interview regarding current availability of a 3-year MD pathway, and/or other variations in curricular innovation, within their institution. Those with 3-year programs answered additional questions.
resultsData from 107 institutions were obtained (75% survey response rate). The most common variation in length of medical education today is the accelerated 3-year pathway. Since 2010, 9 medical schools have introduced parallel 3-year MD programs and another 4 are actively developing such programs. However, the total number of students in 3-year MD tracks remains small (n=199 students, or 0.2% total medical students). Family medicine and general internal medicine are the most common residency programs selected. Benefits of 3-year MD programs generally include reduction in student debt, stability of guaranteed residency positions, and potential for increasing physician numbers in rural/underserved areas. Drawbacks include concern about fatigue/burnout, difficulty in providing guaranteed residency positions, and additional expense in teaching 2 parallel curricula. Four vignettes of alternative innovative and relevant curricular initiatives are also presented in order to place 3-year MD programs in a broader context of medical education reform in the U.S.
conclusionThree-year MD pathways are the most common accelerated alternative available at a small number of medical schools for highly selected students. Long-term evaluation of these programs will be essential to determine if these programs are meeting their goals (e.g., increasing the number of physicians in rural/underserved areas). Benefits and shortcomings of such programs should be carefully examined when considering this approach, or others described, as part of MD curricular options designed to individualize medical education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.