HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Branstetter, B. F. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Branstetter, B. F., IV Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Reply

University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine Pittsburgh, PA

 
WEB—This is a Web exclusive article.

I wish to thank Dr. Ehara for his kind letter [1] and for his interest in our work on medical student education in radiology. I have encountered the same pressures for increased efficiency and decreased redundancy that Dr. Ehara describes. Clinical rotations are starting earlier in the course of medical education, and novel teaching tools such as patient-based learning (PBL) sessions have replaced some of the traditional didactic lectures.

I would offer three pieces of advice to radiologist–educators facing these challenges: First, be aware of the audience. Make sure that all radiology lecturers target their teaching at the proper educational level. Second, integrate with newer teaching methodologies. Be flexible to ensure that online tools and PBL sessions enhance the educational experience. Third, avoid being repetitive. Spread out the radiology education such that smaller amounts of information are provided in each interaction, but provide more frequent interactions throughout the course of medical training.

Radiology educators have developed lectures and teaching materials intended for medical students on their clinical rotations. It is critical to realize that it is not sufficient to give these same lectures to an audience of first-year medical students. As Dr. Ehara points out, first-year students do not have the requisite basic clinical knowledge to absorb and retain more advanced radiology material. Instead, educators need to formulate novel teaching tools and lectures that are dedicated to students in their preclinical years.

At the same time, it is important not to underestimate the skill and enthusiasm of the first-year students. Each year, in giving these lectures, I have been pleasantly surprised by in-depth questions from bright medical students seeking advanced clinical knowledge. Even arcane topics in MR physics and advanced discussions of endovascular therapeutic techniques come up in the PBL sessions.

It is particularly important for early didactic lectures to lay the groundwork for other forms of education such as PBL sessions and radiology decision support tools. Radiologist–educators must be aware of how radiology will be integrated throughout the preclinical curriculum to avoid redundancy in didactic lectures. Establishing a basic foundation of radiology knowledge in the preclinical years enables educators to focus on more advanced topics during clinical rotations. Basic concepts may be revisited in the clinical years, but they can be covered quickly, leaving time for more advanced—and more practical—discussions, such as appropriate utilization and radiologist–clinician communication. Medical students who have a foundation in radiology can also engage more completely in discussions among clinicians about the benefits of specific radiologic examinations. That way, they can build on their radiology education even in the absence of radiologist–educators.

Shorter lectures interspersed with other clinical and basic science teaching permit educators to keep radiology in the minds of the students without having it become burdensome or boring. As most radiologists have experienced, absenteeism can become endemic in dedicated radiology courses (the "radi-holiday"), especially if the students are not adequately integrated into the reviewing room setting. Shorter bursts of radiology education may be better for maintaining student interest, improving educational compliance, and reaching a greater percentage of medical students.

Since the publication of our article [2], we have become involved with teaching at an even earlier point in medical education: a course on biomedical imaging given to biomedical engineering undergraduate students. Lecturing to this audience requires that radiologist–educators once again rethink the type of material that is offered to the students and carefully ensure that the level of education is exciting and informative while still understandable.

Organizations such as the Alliance of Medical Student Educators in Radiology [3] (a section of the Association of University Radiologists) can provide additional support and advice and will enable us to further share and expand on our experiences as radiologist–educators.

References

Top References

 

1. Ehara S. Preclinical medical student education in radiology (letter). AJR 2007;189 : W166[Free Full Text]
2. Branstetter BF IV, Faix LE, Humphrey A, Schumann J. Preclinical medical student training in radiology: the effect of early exposure. AJR 2007; 188:25; [web]W9-W14[CrossRef]
3. Alliance of Medical Student Educators in Radiology Web Site. Available at: www.aur.org/amser/index.html. Accessed May 17, 2007

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Branstetter, B. F. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Branstetter, B. F., IV Social Bookmarking                      What's this?