Advertisement

Radiology curriculum for undergraduate medical studies—A consensus survey

      Aim

      To establish an expert consensus of what, when, and how the teaching of radiology should be incorporated into the core undergraduate medical curriculum.

      Methods and materials

      This Delphi survey consisted of four iterative rounds, with feedback given at the start of each successive round in the form of the results of the previous round. The participants consisted of both radiologists and non-radiologists with significant interest and involvement in radiology and undergraduate/Foundation training. The study addressed the questions of how, where, when, and by whom radiology should be taught.

      Results

      The number of responses in rounds 1–4 was 20, 23, 41, and 25 (25, 22, 31, and 61% response rate, respectively). There was good consensus amongst the responders on the following: radiology teaching must be delivered in conjunction with anatomy and clinical case-based teaching, if possible in the department of radiology on picture archiving and communication system (PACS) workstations, and the teaching should be delivered by a competent and credentialled individual. Case-based assessment was the most agreed method of assessment. The majority of the responders concurred that the curriculum should include general indications for commonly requested radiological investigations, consent and safety issues around radiological tests, and their basic interpretation.

      Conclusion

      The consensus points reached by the present study not only serve as directive principles for developing a more comprehensive radiology curriculum, but also places emphasis on a broader range of knowledge required to promote the best use of a department of radiology by junior doctors in an attempt to improve patient experiences and care.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      Subscribe to Clinical Radiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. Foundation Programme Curriculum. Published March 2010. From Academy of Medical Royal Colleges website. Available at: http://aomrc.org.uk/curriculum-and-framework/curriculum.html. [accessed 31.10.11].

      2. The Trainee Doctor. Published February 2011. From General Medical Council (GMC) website. Available at: www.gmc-uk.org/Trainee_Doctor.pdf_39274940.pdf. [accessed 31.10.11].

        • General Medical Council
        The state of basic medical education.
        (P49–50) GMC, London2011
        • General Medical Council
        The state of basic medical education.
        (P20) GMC, London2010
        • Lowitt N.
        Assessment of an integrated curriculum in radiology.
        Acad Med. 2002; 77: 933
      3. The state of the medical curriculum.
        Lancet. 1906; 167: 384-385
        • Izod Bennett T.
        What is wrong with the medical curriculum?.
        Lancet. 1932; 220: 301-302
        • Barzanksy B.
        • Jonas H.S.
        • Etzel S.I.
        Educational programs in U.S. medical schools, 1998–1999.
        JAMA. 1999; 282: 840-846
        • Holt N.F.
        Medical students need more radiology education.
        Acad Med. 2001; 76: 1
      4. McCoubrie PA. Delphi study to determine the competency-based core outcomes in radiology that a UK medical student should possess at graduation. MEd thesis, University of Sheffield, 2003.

        • Rogers L.F.
        Imaging literacy: a laudable goal in the education of medical students.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003; 180: 1201
        • Fox D.L.
        • Rees M.R.
        Undergraduate education in radiology.
        in: Proceedings of UK radiological congress. British Institute of Radiology, London2001
        • Linstone H.A.
        • Turoff M.
        The Delphi method: techniques and applications.
        Reading: Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers, 1975
        • Rowe G.
        • Wright G.
        The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis.
        Int J Forecast. 1999; 15: 353-375
        • Goodman C.M.
        The Delphi technique: a critique.
        J Adv Nurs. 1987; 12: 729-734
        • Jones J.
        • Hunter D.
        Consensus methods for medical and health services research.
        BMJ. 1995; 311: 376-380
        • Bandaranayake R.
        The concept and practicability of a core curriculum in basic medical education.
        R Med Teach. 2000; 22: 560-563
        • Leung W.C.
        Competency based medical training: review.
        BMJ. 2002; 325: 693-696
        • Harden R.M.
        Approaches to curriculum planning.
        Med Educ. 1986; 20: 458-466
        • Harden R.M.
        Learning outcomes and institutional objectives: is there a difference?.
        Med Teach. 2002; 24: 151-155