Evaluating the Views of Final-Year Medical Students Towards Their Medical Education Model: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Introduction  Undergraduate medical education in the UK tends to follow one of three models: traditional, spiral, or integrated. This paper evaluates medical students' opinions of each model in terms of academic teaching, clinical teaching, and average satisfaction to determine which model is more effective at providing a well-rounded medical education. Method Final-year medical students were asked to fill in a survey evaluating the three models of medical education through three metrics: academic teaching, clinical teaching, and average satisfaction. Five universities were approached to recruit students: two employing the traditional model, two employing the spiral model, and one employing the integrated model. Responses were sought over a four-month period through email communication with final-year medical students. Responses were recorded using a 10-point ordinal scale. Results A total of 416 students' responses were included. The average score for academic teaching was 5.6 ± 1.4; the average score for clinical teaching was 5.4 ± 2.3; and the average satisfaction score was 5.6 ± 1.7. None of the models was significantly better or worse in academic teaching. The spiral curriculum was significantly better in clinical teaching (6.3 ± 1.1, p < 0.05), and the traditional model was significantly worse in clinical teaching (4.9 ± 2.2, p < 0.05). Discussion This novel paper demonstrates the views of final-year medical students towards the three models of medical education. None of the three models of education is superior in academic teaching, raising broader discussion points regarding how medical students absorb and learn medical content. We identify that early clinical exposure produces better clinical learning outcomes, with the integrated model acting as an effective baseline, from which institutes can look to build.