Comparison of performance of undergraduate medical students trained in conventional and integrated curriculums

IF 0.3 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Seyyedha Abbas, Naushaba Sadiq, Tabassum Zehra, I. Ullah, H. Adeeb
{"title":"Comparison of performance of undergraduate medical students trained in conventional and integrated curriculums","authors":"Seyyedha Abbas, Naushaba Sadiq, Tabassum Zehra, I. Ullah, H. Adeeb","doi":"10.4103/ijam.ijam_112_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Foundation University Medical College is one of the few institutions in Pakistan that have developed an Integrated Modular Teaching Program. This mode of teaching is a novel addition to our conventional system and needs evaluation.The objective of this study was to compare the overall cumulative results of undergraduates from (Group A/2015) conventional (old) with (Group B/2016) integrated (new curriculum) final professional examinations and to correlate the overall cumulative results of final professional examinations with their admission test results. Materials And Methods: We compared the final professional examination results of Group A and Group B undergraduates. Both the groups had identical final examinations in terms of pattern, subjects, examiners, and duration. In addition, a measure of central tendency and standard deviation was calculated and made comparisons between entry and final professional examination results. Finally, the t-test was used to compare the theoretical and practical scores. In addition, it established the reliability and validity of the results. Results: The overall performance of undergraduates who trained on integrated curriculum (97.0%) was better than that of undergraduates who had trained on conventional curriculum (85.2%). Comparison between the various components of the professional examinations using the ANOVA test also revealed that the same group of undergraduates performed better with P < 0.05, which is 0.002, which showed significant results. Cronbach's alpha for overall performance was 0.957, whereas for the theoretical and practical examinations, it was 0.792 and 0.897, respectively. Conclusion: The results revealed that the undergraduates who had trained on integrated curriculum had improved performance in the final professional examinations both in theory and practical. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Medical Knowledge, Practice-based learning and improvement, Systems-based practice, and Interpersonal and communication skills.","PeriodicalId":36495,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Academic Medicine","volume":"8 1","pages":"109 - 115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijam.ijam_112_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Introduction: Foundation University Medical College is one of the few institutions in Pakistan that have developed an Integrated Modular Teaching Program. This mode of teaching is a novel addition to our conventional system and needs evaluation.The objective of this study was to compare the overall cumulative results of undergraduates from (Group A/2015) conventional (old) with (Group B/2016) integrated (new curriculum) final professional examinations and to correlate the overall cumulative results of final professional examinations with their admission test results. Materials And Methods: We compared the final professional examination results of Group A and Group B undergraduates. Both the groups had identical final examinations in terms of pattern, subjects, examiners, and duration. In addition, a measure of central tendency and standard deviation was calculated and made comparisons between entry and final professional examination results. Finally, the t-test was used to compare the theoretical and practical scores. In addition, it established the reliability and validity of the results. Results: The overall performance of undergraduates who trained on integrated curriculum (97.0%) was better than that of undergraduates who had trained on conventional curriculum (85.2%). Comparison between the various components of the professional examinations using the ANOVA test also revealed that the same group of undergraduates performed better with P < 0.05, which is 0.002, which showed significant results. Cronbach's alpha for overall performance was 0.957, whereas for the theoretical and practical examinations, it was 0.792 and 0.897, respectively. Conclusion: The results revealed that the undergraduates who had trained on integrated curriculum had improved performance in the final professional examinations both in theory and practical. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Medical Knowledge, Practice-based learning and improvement, Systems-based practice, and Interpersonal and communication skills.
普通医学生与综合医学生学习成绩的比较
简介:基础大学医学院是巴基斯坦为数不多的制定了综合模块化教学计划的机构之一。这种教学模式是对我们传统体系的一种新的补充,需要评估。本研究的目的是比较(2015年A组)传统(旧)和(2016年B组)综合(新课程)期末专业考试的本科生的总体累积成绩,并将期末专业考试总体累积成绩与其入学考试成绩相关联。材料与方法:比较A组和B组本科生的期末专业考试成绩。两组的期末考试在模式、科目、考官和持续时间方面都是相同的。此外,还计算了中心趋势和标准差的测量值,并将入学考试和期末专业考试的结果进行了比较。最后,使用t检验对理论得分和实践得分进行比较。此外,它还建立了结果的可靠性和有效性。结果:接受综合课程培训的本科生的整体表现(97.0%)好于接受常规课程培训的大学生(85.2%)。使用方差分析测试对专业考试的各个组成部分进行比较也显示,同一组本科生的表现更好,P<0.05,即0.002,显示出显著的结果。总体表现的克朗巴赫α为0.957,而理论和实践考试的克朗巴克α分别为0.792和0.897。结论:采用综合课程培训的本科生在期末专业考试中,无论是在理论上还是在实践上都取得了较好的成绩。本文讨论了以下核心能力:医学知识、基于实践的学习和改进、基于系统的实践以及人际交往和沟通技能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Academic Medicine
International Journal of Academic Medicine Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信