Radiology curriculum for medical students: Clinicians' perspectives

Summary This study was conducted to establish clinicians’ perspectives of a set of radiology curriculum topics for medical student teaching, which were held to be important by radiologists. A questionnaire was sent to clinicians in all specialties. Forty‐six clinicians (51.1%) out of 90 returned the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAustralasian radiology Vol. 50; no. 5; pp. 442 - 446
Main Authors Subramaniam, RM, Sherriff, J, Holmes, K, Chan, MC, Shadbolt, B
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Melbourne, Australia Blackwell Publishing Asia 01.10.2006
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Summary This study was conducted to establish clinicians’ perspectives of a set of radiology curriculum topics for medical student teaching, which were held to be important by radiologists. A questionnaire was sent to clinicians in all specialties. Forty‐six clinicians (51.1%) out of 90 returned the questionnaires. All curriculum topics were scored above an average of 4 (agree). The five highest ranking curriculum topics in order of importance were: developing a system for viewing chest radiographs (5.59), developing a system for viewing abdominal radiographs (5.56), developing a system for viewing bone and joint radiographs (5.33), distinguishing normal structures from abnormal in chest and abdominal radiographs (5.33) and identifying gross bone or joint abnormalities in skeletal radiographs (5.22). Correlative analysis between speciality groups showed surgical and medical specialities were significantly different in their responses of two learning outcomes: basic knowledge about the contrast media benefits and risks (P= 0.01) and ability to select the most appropriate and the most cost‐effective methods of radiological investigations for clinical situations (P= 0.03). Acute specialities were not significantly different from the other two groups for these two learning outcomes. There was no statistically significant difference for other learning outcomes between the three speciality groups.
Bibliography:ArticleID:JMIRO1620
istex:5A41B1E1C576632851222753A36A7E6AC789A418
ark:/67375/WNG-G3PG8R01-R
K Holmes
MB ChB
MB BS, BMedSc, MClinEd, MD, FRANZCR
B Shadbolt
PhD.
J Sherriff
RM Subramaniam
;
MC Chan
MB ChB, BHB
Current address: Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0004-8461
1440-1673
DOI:10.1111/j.1440-1673.2006.01620.x