Building upon the foundational science curriculum with physiology-based grand rounds: a multi-institutional program evaluation
Introduction: Vertically integrating physiology into patient care has the potential to improve clinical reasoning. Clinical Physiology Grand Rounds (CPGR) is a case-based teaching method that brings together students from all years of medical school to focus on linking clinical presentations to core...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Medical education online 2021-01, Vol.26 (1), p.1937908-1937908 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1937908 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 1937908 |
container_title | Medical education online |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Langer, Arielle L. Block, Brian L. Schwartzstein, Richard M. Richards, Jeremy B. |
description | Introduction: Vertically integrating physiology into patient care has the potential to improve clinical reasoning. Clinical Physiology Grand Rounds (CPGR) is a case-based teaching method that brings together students from all years of medical school to focus on linking clinical presentations to core basic science concepts including anatomy, physiology, and pathophysiology. In this study, we describe the implementation of CPGR at two different institutions in the United States and assess student-reported outcomes.
Methods: We survey students who participated in CPGR at Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons (P&S) and Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC). Subjects were queried across three domains: the benefits of attending, the impact of concept maps, and the impact of the mixed-learner environment.
Results: Despite differences in session leadership and the underlying medical school curricula, conference attendees reported similar benefits at the two schools included in this study. Students overwhelmingly (92.9%) reported that remembering clinical presentations was easier when they understood the underlying physiology. They also reported gaining a true understanding of concepts that were previously memorized (87.5%). Both clinical (92.5%) and preclinical students (93.1%) valued the mixed-learner environment as a component of the conference.
Discussion: By assuring a mixed-learner environment with near-peer interactions, using concept maps as a teaching tool, and rigorously linking clinical presentation and management to physiological concepts, we found that the key benefits of CPGR were replicable across different institutions, despite several local differences in how CPGR was implemented, led, and conducted. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/10872981.2021.1937908 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2609935086</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_bf59239baaa94c5fa7bac003ec7cd937</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2540515609</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c539t-279bab2b5fb78b6e2f217e2380dc10dd89c31038e21c2275cafde33f3f22412a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kk1v1DAQhiMEoqXwE5AsceGSxR_xJuaAKBUflSpxgbM18ceuV4692HGrvfDbcboLohy42NbMO8-Mxm_TvCR4RfCA39Sjp2IgK4opWRHBeoGHR835Em-XxOO_3mfNs5x3GNMe8_XT5ox1hHSi4-fNzw_Fee3CBpV9DGjeGmRjCRpmFwN4lJUzQRmkSkpOFV8mdOfmLdpvD9lFHzeHdoRsNNokCBqlpTa_RYCm4mfXupBnN5cTbJ9ilU3I3IIv9x2eN08s-GxenO6L5vunj9-uvrQ3Xz9fX13etIozMbe0FyOMdOR27IdxbailpDeUDVgrgrUehGIEs8FQoijtuQKrDWOWWUo7QoFdNNdHro6wk_vkJkgHGcHJ-0BMGwlpdsobOVouKKv9AESnuIV-BIUxM6pXuq65st4dWfsyTkYrE-YE_gH0YSa4rdzEWzlQ3AkuKuD1CZDij2LyLCeXlfEegoklS8o7zAlf40X66h_pLpZUd1lVNS8Yx8O6qvhRpVLMORn7ZxiC5eIW-dstcnGLPLml1r0_1rlgY5rgLiav5QwHH5Ot_6lcluz_iF_vvMkN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2609935086</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Building upon the foundational science curriculum with physiology-based grand rounds: a multi-institutional program evaluation</title><source>Taylor & Francis Open Access</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Co-Action Open Access Journals</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Langer, Arielle L. ; Block, Brian L. ; Schwartzstein, Richard M. ; Richards, Jeremy B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Langer, Arielle L. ; Block, Brian L. ; Schwartzstein, Richard M. ; Richards, Jeremy B.</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction: Vertically integrating physiology into patient care has the potential to improve clinical reasoning. Clinical Physiology Grand Rounds (CPGR) is a case-based teaching method that brings together students from all years of medical school to focus on linking clinical presentations to core basic science concepts including anatomy, physiology, and pathophysiology. In this study, we describe the implementation of CPGR at two different institutions in the United States and assess student-reported outcomes.
Methods: We survey students who participated in CPGR at Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons (P&S) and Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC). Subjects were queried across three domains: the benefits of attending, the impact of concept maps, and the impact of the mixed-learner environment.
Results: Despite differences in session leadership and the underlying medical school curricula, conference attendees reported similar benefits at the two schools included in this study. Students overwhelmingly (92.9%) reported that remembering clinical presentations was easier when they understood the underlying physiology. They also reported gaining a true understanding of concepts that were previously memorized (87.5%). Both clinical (92.5%) and preclinical students (93.1%) valued the mixed-learner environment as a component of the conference.
Discussion: By assuring a mixed-learner environment with near-peer interactions, using concept maps as a teaching tool, and rigorously linking clinical presentation and management to physiological concepts, we found that the key benefits of CPGR were replicable across different institutions, despite several local differences in how CPGR was implemented, led, and conducted.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1087-2981</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1087-2981</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/10872981.2021.1937908</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34114945</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Abingdon: Taylor & Francis</publisher><subject>Clinical decision making ; clinical reasoning ; College students ; concept map ; Concept mapping ; Curricula ; Leadership ; Medical education ; Medical schools ; Mixed-learner environment ; near-peer teaching ; Pathophysiology ; Patients ; Physiology ; Program evaluation ; Students ; Surgeons ; Teaching</subject><ispartof>Medical education online, 2021-01, Vol.26 (1), p.1937908-1937908</ispartof><rights>2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. 2021</rights><rights>2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. 2021 The Author(s)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c539t-279bab2b5fb78b6e2f217e2380dc10dd89c31038e21c2275cafde33f3f22412a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c539t-279bab2b5fb78b6e2f217e2380dc10dd89c31038e21c2275cafde33f3f22412a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0301-7073 ; 0000-0002-8709-4884</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8204959/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8204959/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,12846,27502,27924,27925,30999,53791,53793,59143,59144</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Langer, Arielle L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Block, Brian L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartzstein, Richard M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richards, Jeremy B.</creatorcontrib><title>Building upon the foundational science curriculum with physiology-based grand rounds: a multi-institutional program evaluation</title><title>Medical education online</title><description>Introduction: Vertically integrating physiology into patient care has the potential to improve clinical reasoning. Clinical Physiology Grand Rounds (CPGR) is a case-based teaching method that brings together students from all years of medical school to focus on linking clinical presentations to core basic science concepts including anatomy, physiology, and pathophysiology. In this study, we describe the implementation of CPGR at two different institutions in the United States and assess student-reported outcomes.
Methods: We survey students who participated in CPGR at Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons (P&S) and Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC). Subjects were queried across three domains: the benefits of attending, the impact of concept maps, and the impact of the mixed-learner environment.
Results: Despite differences in session leadership and the underlying medical school curricula, conference attendees reported similar benefits at the two schools included in this study. Students overwhelmingly (92.9%) reported that remembering clinical presentations was easier when they understood the underlying physiology. They also reported gaining a true understanding of concepts that were previously memorized (87.5%). Both clinical (92.5%) and preclinical students (93.1%) valued the mixed-learner environment as a component of the conference.
Discussion: By assuring a mixed-learner environment with near-peer interactions, using concept maps as a teaching tool, and rigorously linking clinical presentation and management to physiological concepts, we found that the key benefits of CPGR were replicable across different institutions, despite several local differences in how CPGR was implemented, led, and conducted.</description><subject>Clinical decision making</subject><subject>clinical reasoning</subject><subject>College students</subject><subject>concept map</subject><subject>Concept mapping</subject><subject>Curricula</subject><subject>Leadership</subject><subject>Medical education</subject><subject>Medical schools</subject><subject>Mixed-learner environment</subject><subject>near-peer teaching</subject><subject>Pathophysiology</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Physiology</subject><subject>Program evaluation</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><subject>Teaching</subject><issn>1087-2981</issn><issn>1087-2981</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>0YH</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kk1v1DAQhiMEoqXwE5AsceGSxR_xJuaAKBUflSpxgbM18ceuV4692HGrvfDbcboLohy42NbMO8-Mxm_TvCR4RfCA39Sjp2IgK4opWRHBeoGHR835Em-XxOO_3mfNs5x3GNMe8_XT5ox1hHSi4-fNzw_Fee3CBpV9DGjeGmRjCRpmFwN4lJUzQRmkSkpOFV8mdOfmLdpvD9lFHzeHdoRsNNokCBqlpTa_RYCm4mfXupBnN5cTbJ9ilU3I3IIv9x2eN08s-GxenO6L5vunj9-uvrQ3Xz9fX13etIozMbe0FyOMdOR27IdxbailpDeUDVgrgrUehGIEs8FQoijtuQKrDWOWWUo7QoFdNNdHro6wk_vkJkgHGcHJ-0BMGwlpdsobOVouKKv9AESnuIV-BIUxM6pXuq65st4dWfsyTkYrE-YE_gH0YSa4rdzEWzlQ3AkuKuD1CZDij2LyLCeXlfEegoklS8o7zAlf40X66h_pLpZUd1lVNS8Yx8O6qvhRpVLMORn7ZxiC5eIW-dstcnGLPLml1r0_1rlgY5rgLiav5QwHH5Ot_6lcluz_iF_vvMkN</recordid><startdate>20210101</startdate><enddate>20210101</enddate><creator>Langer, Arielle L.</creator><creator>Block, Brian L.</creator><creator>Schwartzstein, Richard M.</creator><creator>Richards, Jeremy B.</creator><general>Taylor & Francis</general><general>Taylor & Francis Ltd</general><general>Taylor & Francis Group</general><scope>0YH</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0301-7073</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8709-4884</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210101</creationdate><title>Building upon the foundational science curriculum with physiology-based grand rounds: a multi-institutional program evaluation</title><author>Langer, Arielle L. ; Block, Brian L. ; Schwartzstein, Richard M. ; Richards, Jeremy B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c539t-279bab2b5fb78b6e2f217e2380dc10dd89c31038e21c2275cafde33f3f22412a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Clinical decision making</topic><topic>clinical reasoning</topic><topic>College students</topic><topic>concept map</topic><topic>Concept mapping</topic><topic>Curricula</topic><topic>Leadership</topic><topic>Medical education</topic><topic>Medical schools</topic><topic>Mixed-learner environment</topic><topic>near-peer teaching</topic><topic>Pathophysiology</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Physiology</topic><topic>Program evaluation</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><topic>Teaching</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Langer, Arielle L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Block, Brian L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartzstein, Richard M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richards, Jeremy B.</creatorcontrib><collection>Taylor & Francis Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Medical education online</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Langer, Arielle L.</au><au>Block, Brian L.</au><au>Schwartzstein, Richard M.</au><au>Richards, Jeremy B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Building upon the foundational science curriculum with physiology-based grand rounds: a multi-institutional program evaluation</atitle><jtitle>Medical education online</jtitle><date>2021-01-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1937908</spage><epage>1937908</epage><pages>1937908-1937908</pages><issn>1087-2981</issn><eissn>1087-2981</eissn><abstract>Introduction: Vertically integrating physiology into patient care has the potential to improve clinical reasoning. Clinical Physiology Grand Rounds (CPGR) is a case-based teaching method that brings together students from all years of medical school to focus on linking clinical presentations to core basic science concepts including anatomy, physiology, and pathophysiology. In this study, we describe the implementation of CPGR at two different institutions in the United States and assess student-reported outcomes.
Methods: We survey students who participated in CPGR at Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons (P&S) and Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC). Subjects were queried across three domains: the benefits of attending, the impact of concept maps, and the impact of the mixed-learner environment.
Results: Despite differences in session leadership and the underlying medical school curricula, conference attendees reported similar benefits at the two schools included in this study. Students overwhelmingly (92.9%) reported that remembering clinical presentations was easier when they understood the underlying physiology. They also reported gaining a true understanding of concepts that were previously memorized (87.5%). Both clinical (92.5%) and preclinical students (93.1%) valued the mixed-learner environment as a component of the conference.
Discussion: By assuring a mixed-learner environment with near-peer interactions, using concept maps as a teaching tool, and rigorously linking clinical presentation and management to physiological concepts, we found that the key benefits of CPGR were replicable across different institutions, despite several local differences in how CPGR was implemented, led, and conducted.</abstract><cop>Abingdon</cop><pub>Taylor & Francis</pub><pmid>34114945</pmid><doi>10.1080/10872981.2021.1937908</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0301-7073</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8709-4884</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1087-2981 |
ispartof | Medical education online, 2021-01, Vol.26 (1), p.1937908-1937908 |
issn | 1087-2981 1087-2981 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2609935086 |
source | Taylor & Francis Open Access; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Co-Action Open Access Journals; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central |
subjects | Clinical decision making clinical reasoning College students concept map Concept mapping Curricula Leadership Medical education Medical schools Mixed-learner environment near-peer teaching Pathophysiology Patients Physiology Program evaluation Students Surgeons Teaching |
title | Building upon the foundational science curriculum with physiology-based grand rounds: a multi-institutional program evaluation |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T14%3A38%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Building%20upon%20the%20foundational%20science%20curriculum%20with%20physiology-based%20grand%20rounds:%20a%20multi-institutional%20program%20evaluation&rft.jtitle=Medical%20education%20online&rft.au=Langer,%20Arielle%20L.&rft.date=2021-01-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1937908&rft.epage=1937908&rft.pages=1937908-1937908&rft.issn=1087-2981&rft.eissn=1087-2981&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/10872981.2021.1937908&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2540515609%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2609935086&rft_id=info:pmid/34114945&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_bf59239baaa94c5fa7bac003ec7cd937&rfr_iscdi=true |