A prospective study evaluating the integration of a multifaceted evidence-based medicine curriculum into early years in an undergraduate medical school

Influence of research evidence on the use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules in primary care: an exploratory qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular clinical prediction rules (CPRs) are widely used in primary care. They accumulate research evidence through derivation, external validation, and impact studies. However, existing knowledge about the influence of research evidence on the use of CPRs is limited. Therefore, we explored how primary care clinicians' perceptions of and experiences with research influence their use of cardiovascular CPRs.

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory qualitative interview study with thematic analysis. Primary care clinicians were recruited from the WWAMI (Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana and Idaho) region Practice and Research Network (WPRN). We used purposeful sampling to ensure maximum variation within the participant group. Data were collected by conducting semi-structured online interviews. We analyzed data using inductive thematic analysis to identify commonalities and differences within themes.

RESULTS

Of 29 primary care clinicians who completed the questionnaire, 15 participated in the interview. We identified two main themes relating to the influence of clinicians' perceptions of and experiences with cardiovascular CPR research on their decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs: "Seek and judge" and "be acquainted and assume." When clinicians are familiar with, trust, and feel confident in using research evidence, they might actively search and assess the evidence, which may then influence their decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs. However, clinicians, who are unfamiliar with, distrust, or find it challenging to use research evidence, might be passively acquainted with evidence but do not make their own judgment on the trustworthiness of such evidence. Therefore, these clinicians might not rely on research evidence when making decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians' perceptions and experiences could influence how they use research evidence in decisions about using cardiovascular CPRs. This implies, when promoting evidence-based decisions, it might be useful to target clinicians' unfamiliarity, distrust, and challenges regarding the use of research evidence rather than focusing only on their knowledge and skills. Further, because clinicians often rely on evidence-unrelated factors, guideline developers and policymakers should recommend cardiovascular CPRs supported by high-quality evidence.

Face-to-face versus online clinically integrated EBM teaching in an undergraduate medical school: a pilot study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to test the feasibility and effectiveness of two models (face-to-face vs online teaching) of clinically integrating evidence-based medicine (EBM) teaching in an undergraduate medical school.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A pilot study of face-to-face versus online EBM teaching.

PARTICIPANTS

This study focused on undergraduate medical students who entered the University of Buckingham Medical School MBChB course in 2016 (n=65). Of the 65 students, 45 received face-to-face teaching, while 20 received online teaching.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Feasibility was assessed by the ability to deliver the content, students' engagement during teaching and their completion rates in formative assessments-Assessing Competency in EBM (ACE) tool, and educational prescriptions (EPs). Effectiveness of teaching for the two models was compared by evaluating students' performance in the formative assessments and in the summative final professional examination and final year EBM objective structured clinical examination (OSCE).

RESULTS

We had similar students' engagement and completion rates in formative assessments in both models. Students receiving face-to-face teaching performed better in EPs (mean difference=-2.28, 95% CI: -4.31 to -0.26). There was no significant difference in performances in the ACE tool (mean difference=-1.02, 95% CI: -2.20 to 0.16); the written final professional exams (mean difference=-0.11, 95% CI: -0.65 to 0.44) and the EBM OSCE station (mean difference=-0.81, 95% CI: -2.38 to 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

It was feasible to deliver both models of clinically integrated EBM teaching. While students in the face-to-face model scored higher in EPs; there was no significant difference between the two models of teaching as measured by performances in the ACE tool or the summative assessments.

The effect of integration of basic and clinical aspects of a specific topic in a parasitology course on medical students learning: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Parasitology course is one of the basic science courses in the educational curriculum for medical students. Since the integration of basic and clinical sciences has helped students better understand the basic science course content, the aim of the present study was to determine the effect of integration of basic and clinical aspects of a specific topic in a parasitology course on medical students learning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted on 110 undergraduate fifth-semester medical students from April to July 2018. The students were randomly divided into two groups, based on student identification number: Intervention and control groups. The topic selected for this study from the parasitology course was "cutaneous leishmaniasis." At the beginning of the program, a dermatologist presented the clinical aspects of the topic to the intervention group. Then, a parasitologist delivered a traditional lecture about the basic aspects of the topic to both groups. The students' scores on questions related to cutaneous leishmaniasis in the final exam were used as a measure of learning and teaching outcomes. A questionnaire that consisted of seven items and three open-ended questions was used based on the objectives of the randomized controlled trial. Statistical analysis was performed by SPSS software.

RESULTS

Based on the result of the final examination, there was no significant difference in the learning rate of students between the intervention and control groups (P ≥ 0.05). According to students' comments, the teaching of clinical science alongside basic science increased the importance of the topic and the students' interest in basic science. Most students agreed that this method prepares them for their clinical years.

CONCLUSION

Many medical students believe that the content of many basic science courses are forgotten in the future. Therefore, basic science education alongside clinical science presentations are suggested.

Development and evaluation of a spiral model of assessing EBM competency using OSCEs in undergraduate medical education

BACKGROUND

Medical students often struggle to understand the relevance of Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) to their clinical practice, yet it is a competence that all students must develop prior to graduation. Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) are a valued assessment tool to assess critical components of EBM competency, particularly different levels of mastery as they progress through the course. This study developed and evaluated EBM based OSCE stations with an aim to establish a spiral approach for EBM OSCE stations for undergraduate medical students.

METHODS

OSCE stations were developed with increasingly complex EBM tasks. OSCE stations were classified according to the classification rubric for EBP assessment tools (CREATE) framework and mapped against the recently published core competencies for evidence-based practice (EBP). Performance data evaluation was undertaken using Classical Test Theory analysing mean scores, pass rates, and station item total correlation (ITC) using SPSS.

RESULTS

Six EBM based OSCE stations assessing various stages of EBM were created for use in high stakes summative OSCEs for different year groups across the undergraduate medical degree. All OSCE stations, except for one, had excellent correlation coefficients and hence a high reliability, ranging from 0.21-0.49. The domain mean score ranged from 13.33 to 16.83 out of 20. High reliability was demonstrated for the each of the summative OSCE circuits (Cronbach's alpha = 0.67-0.85). In the CREATE framework these stations assessed knowledge, skills, and behaviour of medical students in asking, searching, appraising, and integrating evidence in practice. The OSCE stations were useful in assessing six core evidence-based practice competencies, which are meant to be practiced with exercises. A spiral model of OSCEs of increasing complexity was proposed to assess EBM competency as students progressed through the MBChB course.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the OSCEs is a feasible method of authentically assessing leaner EBM performance and behaviour in a high stakes assessment setting. Use of valid and reliable EBM-based OSCE stations provide evidence for continued development of a hierarchy of assessing scaffolded learning and mastery of EBM competency. Further work is needed to assess their predictive validity.