A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

A strategy to standardize the learning of core clerkship objectives. | LitMetric

A strategy to standardize the learning of core clerkship objectives.

Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract

Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California at San Francisco, 400 Parnassus Ave., 4th Floor, Box 0320, San Francisco, California 94143-0320, USA.

Published: December 2003

Background: Consistent and effective implementation of clinical clerkship objectives remains elusive. Using the behavioral principles of self assessment, active learning and learner differences, we designed an objectives checklist to ensure that all students mastered a core body of internal medicine (IM) knowledge and to facilitate self-directed learning.

Methods: We developed a 54-item learning objectives checklist card in the IM clerkship. In a randomized controlled trial by clerkship site and block, students in the intervention group received the checklist card and were instructed to obtain sign off on objectives by faculty and housestaff and to seek teaching, literature, and clinical experiences to satisfy objectives unmet through routine activities. Intervention group faculty and housestaff were oriented to the use of the checklist. Both intervention and control groups received the course syllabus. We assessed learning with faculty and housestaff evaluations, student knowledge self-assessment, and a written examination. Satisfaction with the cards was assessed with written evaluations.

Results: There were no significant differences in ward evaluations, examination scores or self-assessed knowledge between students using the learning objectives cards and control groups. Faculty were more likely than students to agree that objectives cards improved education.

Conclusions: An intervention designed to guide students in the use of a learning objectives card did not enhance learning as assessed by ward evaluations, a written examination, and satisfaction surveys. It is possible that more sensitive outcome measures could detect differences in knowledge for students using learning objectives checklist cards.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/a:1026091528634DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

learning objectives
16
objectives checklist
12
faculty housestaff
12
students learning
12
objectives
10
learning
8
clerkship objectives
8
checklist card
8
intervention group
8
control groups
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!