Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

What Physicians Wished They Would Have Learned in Medical School: a Survey

  • Original research
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Medical students must be provided the basic science knowledge appropriate and applicable for preparing them for best-practice medicine. To date, there have been no documented studies in the USA that have directly surveyed practicing physicians on their perspectives of their basic science/preclinical medical school education and how it could be modified to help them deliver best patient care. This study was the first to examine this information.

Method

A survey was administered to the alumni of Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine, Harlem, NY (2011–2018), with questions on examining perspectives on basic science disciplines, the need for a basic science refresher course, and other educational topics. In addition, questions relating to demographics and type of medical practice were also asked. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS.

Results

(1) Gender (N = 122): 55% male and 44% female; (2) medical specialty (N = 107): 51.40% Primary Care physicians (Family medicine, Internal medicine, Pediatrics), 48.60% Other Specialties; (3) top Disciplines that “should have more”: Physiology (41.1%), Pharmacology (39.3%), and Preventative Medicine/Public Health (39.3%); Top disciplines that “should have less”: Histology Laboratory (38.32%), Embryology (35.51%), Histology (didactic) (28.30%) (N = 107); (4) top topics “most important” to be included in curriculum: Analysis of Journal Articles (70.10%), Clinical Cases (70.1%), and Early Patient Exposure (64.5%) (N = 107); (5) presentation of a clinically relevant Basic Science refresher course had a positive response (84.4%) (N = 107).

Conclusions

Pharmacology, Physiology, Clinical Cases, Journal Article Analysis, and Early Patient exposure were among topics requiring “more” in preclinical education. A clinically relevant basic science course was deemed useful. The perspectives of practicing physicians should be included when designing future medical school curriculums.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Thomas PA, Kern DE. Internet resources for curriculum development in medical education: an annotated bibliography. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19(5 Pt 2):599–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Rooholamini A, Amini M, Bazrafkan L, Dehghani MR, Esmaeilzadeh Z, Nabeiei P, et al. Program evaluation of an integrated basic science medical curriculum in Shiraz Medical School, using CIPP evaluation model. J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2017;5(3):148–54.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bland CJ, Starnaman S, Wersal L, Moorehead-Rosenberg L, Zonia S, Henry R. Curricular change in medical schools: how to succeed. Acad Med. 2000;75(6):575–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chen DR, Priest KC, Batten JN, Fragoso LE, Reinfeld BI, Laitman BM. Student perspectives on the “step 1 climate” in preclinical medical education. Acad Med. 2019;94(3):302–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Burk-Rafel J, Jones RL, Farlow JL. Engaging learners to advance medical education. Acad Med. 2017;92(4):437–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Goldfarb S, Morrison G. Continuous curricular feedback: a formative evaluation approach to curricular improvement. Acad Med. 2014;89(2):264–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fetterman DM, Deitz J, Gesundheit N. Empowerment evaluation: a collaborative approach to evaluating and transforming a medical school curriculum. Acad Med. 2010;85(5):813–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. O'Keeffe GW, Davy S, Barry DS. Radiologist’s views on anatomical knowledge amongst junior doctors and the teaching of anatomy in medical curricula. Ann Anat. 2019;223:70–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hamano J, Hanari K, Tamiya N. Attitudes and other factors influencing end-of-life discussion by physicians, nurses, and care staff: a nationwide survey in Japan. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2019:1049909119876568.

  10. Wheat J, Brandon J, Cox M, et al. Teaching medical students in the rural setting long term: physicians’ attitudes and perceptions. South Med J. 2019;112(10):526–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Danek RL, Berlin KL, Waite GN, Geib RW. Perceptions of nutrition education in the current medical school curriculum. Fam Med. 2017;49(10):803–6.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Survey: Physicians Assessment of Medical Curriculum. https://tourocollege.az1.qualtrics.com/WRQualtricsControlPanel_rel/File.php?F=F_bOSHtCIg56dpTed

  13. Association of American Family Practitioners. https://www.aafp.org/about/policies/all/primary-care.html. Accessed 6 Nov 6 2019

  14. Osteopathic Medical Profession report 2018. https://osteopathic.org/wp-content/uploads/2018-OMP-Report.pdf. Accessed 6 Nov 2019

  15. Fineberg H. Public health and medicine. Am J Prev Med. 2011;41(4):S149–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ormond BA, Sillman BC, Waidmann TA, et al. Potential national and state medical care savings from disease prevention. Am J Public Health. 2011;101(1):157–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bowe CM, Voss J, Thomas AH. Case method teaching: an effective approach to integrate the basic and clinical sciences in the preclinical medical curriculum. Med Teach. 2009;31(9):834–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Miles S, Kellett J, Leinster SJ. Medical graduates’ preparedness to practice: a comparison of undergraduate medical school training. BMC Med Educ. 2017;17(1):33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lucia VC, Swanberg SM. Utilizing journal club to facilitate critical thinking in pre-clinical medical students. Int J Med Educ. 2018;9:7–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Wenrich MD, Jackson MB, Wolfhagen I, et al. What are the benefits of early patient contact?--a comparison of three preclinical patient contact settings. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13:80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ganguly P, Yaqinuddin A, Al-Kattan W, et al. Medical education dilemma: how can we best accommodate basic sciences in a curriculum for 21st century medical students? Can J Physiol Pharmacol. 2019;97(4):293–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Schmidt HG, Machiels-Bongaerts M, Hermans H, ten Cate T, Venekamp R, Boshuizen HP. The development of diagnostic competence: comparison of a problem-based, an integrated, and a conventional medical curriculum. Acad Med. 1996;71(6):658–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Demyan L, Harview C, Miller E, Wilkerson L, Salusky IB. Development of a translational research pathway at the David Geffen School of Medicine University of California, Los Angeles. Int J Med Educ. 2017;8:334–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gillman J, Pillinger M, Plottel CS, Galeano C, Maddalo S, Hochman JS, et al. Teaching translational research to medical students: the New York University School of Medicine’s Master’s of Science in Clinical Investigation dual-degree program. Clin Transl Sci. 2015;8(6):734–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Willey JM, Lim YS, Kwiatkowski T. Modeling integration: co-teaching basic and clinical sciences medicine in the classroom. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2018;9:739–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kulasegaram KM, Chaudhary Z, Woods N, Dore K, Neville A, Norman G. Contexts, concepts and cognition: principles for the transfer of basic science knowledge. Med Educ. 2017;51(2):184–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Woods NN, Brooks LR, Norman GR, et al. It all makes sense: biomedical knowledge, causal connections and memory in the novice diagnostician. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2007;12(4):405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Van der Veken J, Valcke M, De Maeseneer J, et al. Impact on knowledge acquisition of the transition from a conventional to an integrated contextual medical curriculum. Med Educ. 2009;43(7):704–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Varjavand N, Pereira N, Delvadia D. Returning inactive obstetrics and gynecology physicians to clinical practice: the Drexel experience. J Contin Educ Heal Prof. 2015;35(1):65–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Varjavand N, Greco M, Novack DH, Schindler BA. Assessment of an innovative instructional program to return non-practicing physicians to the workforce. Med Teach. 2012;34(4):285–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wiernik PH. Public Policy Committee of the American College of Clinical Pharmacology. A dangerous lack of pharmacology education in medical and nursing schools: a policy statement from the American College of Clinical Pharmacology. J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;55(9):953–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine, 230 West 125th Street, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Judith M. Binstock

  2. New York Institute of Technology College of Osteopathic Medicine, 101 Northern Blvd., Old Westbury, NY, 11568, USA

    Maria A. Pino

  3. Touro College School of Health Sciences, 1700 Union Blvd., Bay Shore, NY, 11706, USA

    Louis H. Primavera

Authors
  1. Judith M. Binstock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria A. Pino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Louis H. Primavera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Judith M. Binstock.

Ethics declarations

An Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained prior to survey distribution, highlighting our objectives and the questions that would be asked to these graduates.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Binstock, J.M., Pino, M.A. & Primavera, L.H. What Physicians Wished They Would Have Learned in Medical School: a Survey. Med.Sci.Educ. 30, 299–306 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-019-00903-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-019-00903-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation