TY - JOUR
T1 - Does undergraduate curriculum design make
a difference to readiness to practice as a
junior doctor?
AU - Bleakley, Alan
AU - Brennan, Nicola
PY - 2011/5/24
Y1 - 2011/5/24
N2 - Background: Undergraduate medicine curricula can be designed to enable smoother transition to work as a junior doctor. Evaluations should improve curriculum design.
Aim: To compare a graduate cohort from one medical school with a cohort from other medical schools in the same Foundation Year 1 (FY1) programme in terms of retrospective perceptions of readiness for practice.
Method: A Likert-scale questionnaire measured self-perception of readiness to practice, including general capabilities and specific
clinical skills.
Results: Response rate was 74% (n=146). The Peninsula Medical School cohort reported readiness for practice at a significantly
higher level than the comparison cohort in 14 out of 58 items (24%), particularly for ‘coping with uncertainty’. In only one item (2%) does the comparison cohort report at a significantly higher level.
Conclusions: Significant differences between cohorts may be explained by undergraduate curriculum design, where the opportunity for early, structured work-based, experiential learning as students, with patient contact at the core of the experience, may promote smoother transition to work as a junior doctor. Evaluation informs continuous quality improvement of the curriculum.
AB - Background: Undergraduate medicine curricula can be designed to enable smoother transition to work as a junior doctor. Evaluations should improve curriculum design.
Aim: To compare a graduate cohort from one medical school with a cohort from other medical schools in the same Foundation Year 1 (FY1) programme in terms of retrospective perceptions of readiness for practice.
Method: A Likert-scale questionnaire measured self-perception of readiness to practice, including general capabilities and specific
clinical skills.
Results: Response rate was 74% (n=146). The Peninsula Medical School cohort reported readiness for practice at a significantly
higher level than the comparison cohort in 14 out of 58 items (24%), particularly for ‘coping with uncertainty’. In only one item (2%) does the comparison cohort report at a significantly higher level.
Conclusions: Significant differences between cohorts may be explained by undergraduate curriculum design, where the opportunity for early, structured work-based, experiential learning as students, with patient contact at the core of the experience, may promote smoother transition to work as a junior doctor. Evaluation informs continuous quality improvement of the curriculum.
UR - https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/context/more-foh-research/article/1000/viewcontent/4._20Does_20undergraduate_20curriculum_20design_20make_20a_20difference_20to_20readiness_20to_20practice_20as_20a_20junior_20doctor_20PEARL.pdf
U2 - 10.3109/0142159X.2010.540267
DO - 10.3109/0142159X.2010.540267
M3 - Article
SN - 0142-159X
VL - 33
SP - 459
EP - 467
JO - Medical Teacher
JF - Medical Teacher
IS - 6
ER -