Plenary

Friday, June 13

8:00 – 9:00 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

SPECIAL ADDRESS

 

Contributing to the Psychiatric

Education Literature:  A Down-to-earth

Look at the Process of Getting Published

 

Laura Weiss Roberts, M.D.

University of New Mexico

Editor-in-Chief of Academic Psychiatry

 

Educational goals: This plenary presentation will provide an introduction to the process of getting published in the psychiatric education literature, giving guidance on how to approach the writing process, on what makes a good paper, and on emerging ethical standards in the medical education literature

 

Method:  Participants will be introduced to the process of getting a paper published in the psychiatric education literature, including manuscript preparation, submission, editorial review, peer-review, revision and resubmission, editorial decision-making, and publication production.  Information will be provided on specialized format papers, such as annotated bibliographies, review papers, brief reports.  Specific strategies for assessing one’s strengths and motivations as a writer and collaborator, for choosing the “right“ target journal for a paper, for selecting the “right” presentation of the content, for responding to reviewers’ concerns, and for working with editors will be addressed.  We will also cover important but seldom discussed considerations related to collaboration with co-authors, authorship “ethics”, and scientific integrity issues. Essential skills for medical educators regarding ethical and regulatory issues in educational research will be outlined.  Relevant federal regulations for educational research will be outlined. 

 

Results:  This presentation is aimed at enhancing the understanding and skills of early and middle career academic psychiatrists with an interest in writing manuscripts for publication in the field of psychiatric education.  It will also be valuable for more senior faculty who serve as mentors, senior authors, and guest editors.

 

Conclusions:  This plenary session will help enhance confidence and competence of members of the audience in approaching the process of getting published in the psychiatric education literature.

 

 

 

 

Workshop

Friday, June 13

9:00 – 10:15 a.m.

Wapiti 1

 

Clerkships:  Going Paperless

 

Aurora J. Bennett, M.D.

University of Cincinnati

Lowell Tong, M.D.

University of California, San Francisco

Kemal Sagduyu, M.D.

University of Missouri, Kansas City

 

Educational goals:  This workshop will provide various examples of innovative web or server-based on-line evaluation programs being utilized by Psychiatry Clerkships across the country.  We will describe the benefits and challenges inherent in the development and implementation of these evaluation systems.

Description:  Advances in technology are becoming increasingly more available, affordable, and useful in the field of medical education.  Students now entering the clerkships possess greater familiarity and comfort with accessing notes, tests, lectures, and medical literature from computers and PDAs.  It is an optimal time to discuss the transition to a relatively “paperless” clerkship, as web-or server-based evaluation systems are increasingly available and becoming more prevalent in medical schools and residency programs.

 

On-line schedules and evaluations were introduced into the clerkships at our various institutions during the past two years.  The on-line programs utilized by our departments range from large commercial programs to small clerkship-specific designs.  Students and faculty complete evaluations on-line and the data are organized in a manner that facilitates the tracking of various sites and preceptors.  Reports are readily generated that provide faculty with their individual scores and comments, from students, along with the numerical averages at comparable sites.  The development and implementation of these programs has been challenging, but the rewards far exceed the difficulties.  Examples of the various systems will be viewed as a means of promoting discussion about the pros and cons of the varying designs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Workshop

Friday, June 13

9:00 – 10:15 a.m.

Moose 2

 

Using Guided Role-plays to Prepare

Students for Standardized Patient Experiences

 

Julia Frank, M.D.

George Washington University


Educational goals:  Participants in this workshop will learn how to
use semistructured role playing exercises to teach interviewing skills
and the skills of psychiatric assessment in primary care settings.

Description:  For the last five years, clerks at the George Washington University
School of Medicine have learned outpatient psychiatric assessment skills
in part through participating in a series of semistructured role plays.
These exercises, which build on the problem based methods used in
preclinical courses, may be self or faculty led in groups ranging from
four to thirty people. Students are assigned in advance to be a primary
care doctor, an unfamiliar patient or a psychiatric consultant. The
latter two receive specific information and research their tasks ahead
of time. During the exercise, the naive primary care doctor interviews
the patient, observers join in, and finally the consultant reviews the
diagnosis and treatment options for the group as a whole.

This method, which has generally been well received by students,
resembles the standardized patient experiences that will soon be part of
national boards. The interviews are longer than typical SP experiences,
but the format allows for direct observation of interviewing technique
and feedback, with particular emphasis on simultaneous
behavioral-psychiatric and medical assessment.

Workshop participants will be invited to participate in a sample
exercise and to review the available feedback. They will then have time
to offer their reactions and suggestions for improving this experience.
A complete copy of the current curriculum will be available for
participants to take and adapt to their own institutions.

 

 

 

 

 

Workshop

Friday, June 13

9:00 – 10:15 a.m.

Wapiti 2

 

(Down-to-earth) Writers’ Workshop: 

Writing Manuscripts for Publication

 

Laura Weiss Roberts, M.D

University of New Mexico

John Coverdale, M.D.

Baylor School of Medicine

Alan Louie, M.D.

University of California, San Francisco

Academic Psychiatry

 

Educational goals: This workshop is a down-to-earth, hands-on introduction to the essential skills of writing manuscripts for publication in peer-reviewed academic medical journals. 

 

Method:  In helping participants to build their writing skills, the course will involve presentation of valuable and detailed information on the framework of empirical and conceptual manuscripts and of specialized format papers, such as annotated bibliographies, review papers, brief reports.  Participants will be introduced to the process of getting a paper published, including manuscript preparation, submission, editorial review, peer-review, revision and resubmission, editorial decision-making, and publication production.  This process will be discussed in a step-by-step fashion, giving insights from the perspective of writers, reviewers, and editors.  Specific strategies for assessing one’s strengths and motivations as a writer and collaborator, for choosing the “right“ target journal for a paper, for selecting the “right” presentation of the content, for responding to reviewers’ concerns, and for working with editors will be addressed.  We will also cover important but seldom discussed considerations related to collaboration with co-authors, authorship “ethics”, and scientific integrity issues. This workshop will involve interactive learning and Q and A formats, and it will have a tone of warmth and collegiality.  Up-to-date resource materials will be provided to all participants.  

 

Results:  This workshop is aimed at enhancing the skills of early and middle career academic psychiatrists with respect to writing manuscripts for publication in peer-reviewed journals.  It will also be valuable for more senior faculty who serve as mentors, senior authors, and guest editors.

 

Conclusions:  Psychiatric educators may receive benefit from activities which enhance and expand their skill set and prepare them for the tasks of careers in academic psychiatry.

Poster

Friday, June 13

10:15 – 10:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

Psychiatrists Compared to Other Specialists on Performance Before, During and After Medical School: Over Three Decades of Data from the Jefferson Longitudinal Study

 

Frederick S. Sierles, M.D.

Finch University of Health Sciences/The Chicago Medical School

Michael J. Vergare, M.D.

Mohammadreza Hojat, Ph.D.

Joseph S. Gonnella, M.D.

Thomas Jefferson University

 

Educational goals:  Participants will compare longitudinal academic performance of psychiatrists compared to other specialists, and discuss the implications of this for career counseling and curriculum development for third and early fourth year

medical students and first year psychiatry residents, and for recruitment of medical students into psychiatry.

 

Objectives:  This study was designed to compare psychiatrists with other physicians on measures of academic performance before, during and after medical school.

 

Method:  More than three decades of data for graduates of Jefferson Medical College (n=5,701) were analyzed.  Those who pursued psychiatry were compared to physicians in seven other specialties on 21 performance measures.  Using analysis of covariance controlled gender effect.

 

Results:  Psychiatrists performed better on measures of verbal ability and general information before medical school, and in evaluations of knowledge and skills in behavioral sciences during medical school, but not on the examinations of general medical sciences.  Also, in their first year of residency training, psychiatrists were rated high on the clinical competence area of socioeconomic aspects of patient care, but not in the areas of knowledge and data gathering, interpersonal skills and attitudes.  The latter finding is counterintuitive but readily explainable. 

 

Conclusions: The results have implications for career counseling of third year and early-fourth-year medical students, for program planning and career counseling for first year psychiatry residents, and for recruitment of medical students into psychiatry.  More attention should be paid to the general medical education of psychiatrists and other non-generalist specialists.

 

 

Poster

Friday, June 13

10:15 – 10:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

Professional Development Groups for Medical Students


Julia Frank, M.D.
George Washington University

 

Educational goals:

1.      Increase students’ self-awareness in their interactions with psychiatric patients.

2.      Increase students’ tolerance for patients’ distress.

3.      Improve residents’ ability to use non-directive teaching methods with medical students.


Description:  Since July, 2002, students on their third year psychiatry
clerkship at George Washington University School of Medicine have
participated in a modified group exercise based on the work of Michael
and Enid Balint. This method, used extensively with primary care
practitioners in England and in some US residency programs, involves
small group sessions in which one member is instructed to present a
patient from the point of view of the doctor patient relationship. The
presenter is encouraged to reflect on his/her reactions to the
patient, for the purpose of understanding more about the patient, based upon
the countertransference he/she elicits. Others in the group then comment
on the dyad presented.


Groups of 8 students meet three times during the clerkship for an hour
fifteen minutes. Advanced residents lead the groups, under the
supervision of a resident who has received special training in
Balint’s methods.


Conclusions
:  Based on anonymous feedback, students have found these
groups helpful in buffering the emotional stress of dealing with very
ill psychiatric patients, especially children. The residents leading
the groups have also expressed high levels of satisfaction with the
experience, which leads to an open discussion of issues rarely
addressed during formal clerkship didactics. By June, there will be
enough feedback available to comment on whether this experience
increases or stifles students’ self declared interest in working with
the mentally ill.

Poster

Friday, June 13

10:15 – 10:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

Supervising the Supervisors:  A Group for Faculty and

Resident Development in the Education of Medical Students

 

Ruth M. Lamdan, M.D.

Temple University

 

Educational goals:  At the conclusion of this poster, participants will gain an understanding of the group process as a tool for faculty development and assurance of uniformity amongst clerkship training sites as mandated by the LCME.

 

Introduction:            Temple University School of Medicine Department of Psychiatry faculty has more than doubled in size over the past year with the hiring of our new graduates.  This paucity of teaching experience in our new faculty and the “end of school” medical student survey from the AAMC alerted us to educational needs of our students. 

 

Method:  At the recommendation of our Chair and Chief of Service we created a “Supervising the Supervisors” group to address these training goals.  This forum has been used for the purpose of improving resident supervision in psychiatry residency training programs. Our review of the literature failed to uncover its utility or description.  Our monthly group for all faculty and our chief residents is ongoing.  We are addressing both the content and process of the clinical clerkship curriculum, the evaluation process and the critical clinical skills which we require to pass the rotation.

 

Findings/Results:  We will report on the beginning development of this group:  the growth of our faculty identity and cohesiveness, specific training directives, evaluation standards, specific curriculum and course content: to establish our unique educational culture.  Future goals include the development of qualitative measures of our faculty process.  We will also disseminate the new standards and techniques for improving the supervision of medical students to our off-site faculty to assure uniformity amongst training sites and enhance their supervisory skills. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Poster

Friday, June 13

10:15 – 10:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

A Computerized Self-Assessment

Module for Psychiatry Medical Students

 

Simon Kung, M.D.

Maria I. Lapid, M.D.

Lois E. Krahn, M.D.

Mayo Clinic

Educational goals:  To learn about (1) a free computerized self-assessment module for medical students in Psychiatry clerkships, (2) how to use this module at your own institution, and (3) how to contribute to this project.

Description:  Adult learning techniques (such as self-directed learning) have become more popular in today’s teaching, and today’s medical students are increasingly computer-savvy.  There is a wealth of computer-based learning materials available, ranging from on-line textbooks to interactive CD-ROM’s.  However, a simple internet search for computerized Psychiatry self-assessment programs failed to yield usable results.  While they may exist, they are not readily accessible.

 

We designed a simple and user-friendly computer program to allow students to self-test their knowledge of Psychiatry.  The program presents a series of multiple-choice questions drawn from a databank of questions geared towards content found on standardized, national Psychiatry examinations.  Students are familiar with this method of testing because of the computerized USMLE examinations.  The program runs on any Microsoft Windows computer that has Microsoft Access, a widely-available database program.

 

In the spirit of academic collaboration and to decrease barriers to access, we plan to share this program, free of charge, with anyone who is interested.  Because we are writing these assessment questions ourselves, we also welcome contributions to our databank of questions.  Future plans include producing a similar program for the wildly popular Palm-style computers.

Conclusions:  We will demonstrate a practical computer program for medical student self-assessment, and project that it will be useful in improving their knowledge of and interest in Psychiatry.  We also hope to begin a collaborative effort to develop a nationally available question databank.

 

 

 

Poster

Friday, June 13

10:15 – 10:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Dimensions of First Year Medical Student

Religiosity and Correlation with Attitude

Towards Psychiatry and the Behavioral Sciences

W. Grady Carter M.D., M.Div.

Larry E. Robinson, D.Min.

Yashica Marshall, B.S.

Mercer University School of Medicine

 Macon, Georgia

       

 

Introduction:  Despite a growing interest in addressing religious and spiritual issues in the undergraduate medical curriculum relatively little is known about medical student religiosity, how it is affected by medical education, and how it correlates with medical students’ attitudes towards psychiatry and the behavioral sciences.  This poster presents initial, pilot data from a longitudinal project, which will follow medical students over the course of their medical education and assess these things.

Educational goals:

1.      To quantify key dimensions of medical student religiosity, specifically organizational religious practice, non-organizational religious practice, intrinsic religiosity, and religious coping.

2.      To assess medical students’ views of the role of  religion and spirituality in the medical school curriculum

3.      To assess medical students’ views of the role of  religion and spirituality in the practice of medicine

4.      To assess first year medical students’ attitudes towards psychiatry and the behavioral sciences

5.      To see if key dimensions of medical student religiosity correlate with students’ views of the role of  religion and spirituality in the medical school curriculum

6.      To see if key dimensions of medical student religiosity correlate with attitudes towards psychiatry and the behavioral sciences.

 

Description:  First year medical students at Mercer University School of Medicine were surveyed using the Duke University Religion Index, R-COPE (religious coping), Intrinsic Religious Motivation Scale, Attitudes Towards Religion in Medicine Scale, ATP-30 (attitudes towards psychiatry), and Behavioral Medicine Questionnaire (attitudes towards behavioral science.)  The results of each survey will be quantified and the data will be analyzed for correlation between the various instruments.  Associations with age, sex, and choice of medical specialty will also be analyzed.  This group of medical students will be re-surveyed at the end of their second and fourth years of medical school to assess for change over the course of medical education.

 

Conclusion:  Relatively little is known about medical student religiosity and attitudes towards addressing religion and spirituality in the medical school curriculum.  This poster will present pilot results of an assessment of several dimensions of medical student religiosity and associations with attitudes towards psychiatry and the behavioral sciences.

 

 

 

Poster

Friday, June 13

10:15 – 10:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Pre-Clinical Medical School Education:

The Patient Perspective

 

Lois E. Krahn, M.D.

Mayo Clinic

 

 

Educational goals:

1.      Participants will be aware of the degree of satisfaction and willingness to return that patients interviewed in a pre-clinical medical student course expressed.

2.      Participants will be aware of the multiple reasons that patients provided for participating in the medical student course, many of which revealed an altruistic desire to help students and health care institutions.

3.      Participants will be able to consider identifying a group of psychiatric outpatients willing to be involved with small group sessions in pre-clinical courses.

 

 

Purpose:  The purpose of this project is to understand why patients are willing to come in for appointments arranged purely for the sake of medical education. By understanding the patient perspective, we hope to better understand the nature of the experience for our students as well as develop means to recruit more patients as participants.

 

Introduction:  For over eight years Mayo Medical School has had a patient-oriented preclinical course called "Introduction to Psychopathology." The course includes 18 hours of lectures. The course was designed to incorporate active adult learning techniques and use a case method teaching style. Each day after an introductory lecture, the students break up into groups of 6-7 students where they interview patients. Each small group has the opportunity to interview 15 patients. The patients are recruited from the inpatient units as well as outpatient practice. In the past we have tried using standardized patients. However we found that when available, actual patients had several advantages over standardized patients'. Recruiting appropriate patients is a potential challenge. Outpatient participants are suggested to the education secretary by their psychiatrist or psychologist. The secretary contacts them and asks them if they would be willing to participate. The patients participate in two interviews an afternoon. The interviews are 30 minutes in length and followed by a 30-minute break during which time the small groups discuss the patient's interview. The patient is not present for the students' discussion. Patients are paid for their participation.

 

Method:  A six-question survey was mailed to all participating outpatients after the course. This study was approved by the Mayo IRB.

 

Results:  Surveys were sent to the 15 patients who participated in the 2002 course.  The mean age was 50 years (range 27-70) and 73% were women. Eleven patients responded (73%). The mean duration of participation was 3.5 years (range 1-8 years). Patients were highly satisfied with their experience (mean 4.7 on a 5-point scale with 5 highly satisfied, range 3-5). Their reasons for participating are listed in Table I. All would be willing to participate again.

 

TABLE I

MOTIVATION FOR PARTICIPATING

Desire to help students

100%

Opportunity to teach about their illness

91%

Wish to satisfy their psychiatrist

18%

Opportunity to meet students/teachers

73%

Enjoyable

64%

Financial Compensation

65%

Desire to support the institution

91%

 

Conclusions:  Patients who returned the survey expressed a high degree of satisfaction and a willingness to return next year. They provided multiple reasons for participating, many of which revealed an altruistic desire to help students and health care institutions. More medical schools could consider identifying a group of psychiatric outpatients willing to be involved with small group sessions in pre-clinical courses.

 

Reference:  Krahn LE, Bostwick JM, Sutor, B, Olsen MW. "The Challenge of Empathy: A Pilot Study Using Standardized Patients to Teach Introductory Psychopathology to Medical Students." Academic Psychiatry. 2002,26:26-30.

 

 

 

Poster

Friday, June 13

10:15 – 10:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Patient Acceptance and Comfort Level Regarding

Medical Students in Psychiatric Outpatient Clinic

Tarak Vasavada, M.D.

Kristi O’Dell, Ph.D.

Rikki Smith, M.D.

University of Alabama

 

Educational goals:  To help participants to better prepare medical students for patient interaction by being aware of patient comfort and confidence about seeing medical students in an academic psychiatric outpatient clinic.

 

Method:  The authors developed a self-administered questionnaire that was distributed to patients waiting for an office visit with the psychiatrists who served as faculty for third year medical students in an academic institution.  The questionnaire asked patients about their comfort levels with having medical students present during their visits and their confidence in the abilities of medical students.

 

Results:  Ninety-nine patients completed the survey.  The majority was female (76%) and Caucasian (84%).  Twelve respondents were excluded due to missing data.  A majority of patients accepted students as student doctors in training; 36% of patients preferred to see physician only; and 41% preferred to see the physician only during first visit.  Patients were uncomfortable discussing sexual issues (49%), marital problems (30%), substance abuse issues (27%), and financial and legal issues (28%) with medical students.  Some patients felt that they had to repeat their stories.  Greater than 95% of patients rated students favorably in their skills and professionalism. 

 

Conclusions:  Although generalizations to all patients are limited by the sampling design of the study, the majority of patients are accepting of medical students in the academic psychiatry clinic.  Despite patient confidence in medical students’ abilities, a sizeable minority prefers to see the physician only.  This may be due in part to having to repeat their histories to multiple professionals.  Academic psychiatric physicians should prepare medical students for some patient discomfort in talking with them and particularly as regards more sensitive issues.

 

 

Plenary

Friday, June 13

10:45 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

ASSESSMENT, PART I:  MEASURING

ATTITUDES AND PERFORMANCE

 

Amy Brodkey, M.D., Chair

University of Pennsylvania

 

School-by-School Trends in Medical Student

Career Choice of Psychiatry, 1999-2001

 

Frederick S. Sierles, M.D.

Stephen H. Dinwiddie, M.D.

Delia Patroi, M.D.

Nutan Atre-Vaidya, M.D.

Michael J. Schrift, D.O.

John Woodard, M.D.

Finch University of Health Sciences/The Chicago Medical School

 

Educational goals:  Participants will be able to summarize the factors that influence school-by-school trends in medical student career choice of psychiatry.

 

Introduction: The proportion of students matching into psychiatry (PMP) at each medical school results from a complex interplay between national and regional trends (extrinsic variables) and characteristics of each school, including the quality of its psychiatric education (intrinsic).  The authors ascertained which extrinsic factors are associated with school-by-school differences in PMP from 1999-01.

 

Methods: The authors obtained the PMP for each U.S. school (data for individual schools is confidential and will not be mentioned) from student affairs deans and the National Residency Matching Program (NRMP).  They obtained data about the independent variables from the AMA, the AAMC, the APA and Harvard’s HealthSystem Consortium.  Data were analyzed using SPSS 11.

 

Results:  The best predictor of a school’s PMP is its PMP from the prior year.  There were no significant associations between PMP and the school’s funding, tuition, clerkship length, having a psychiatrist dean, ethnic composition of the student body, admissions preference for students from rural areas or underserved minority populations or preferring primary care.  Findings about the association between PMP and local managed care penetration were surprising and initially counterintuitive.  There was a significant, low-magnitude inverse correlation between PMP and proportions of IMGs in the psychiatry residency.  PMP for geographic region has changed notably since 1991-92.

 

Conclusions:  Though national trends are currently conducive to medical students choosing psychiatry, individual departments cannot expect to be beneficiaries of good fortune in their students choosing psychiatry based on regional or school related “extrinsic” factors such as Southern location or public funding.  It is reasonable to infer, therefore, that departments wishing to improve their PMP must provide the resources in personnel and time to produce the best possible education programs.

 

Plenary

Friday, June 13

10:45 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

Researching the Effect of Medical School
On Attitudes Toward Psychiatric Illness

 

George W. Christison, M.D.

Loma Linda University

 

Educational goals:  Upon completion of this presentation, those present should be able to:

1.      Summarize the main findings of the literature on the effects of medical curricula on attitudes toward persons with psychiatric conditions

2.      List questions that remain insufficiently answered regarding this area

3.      Describe useful methodologies for researching this area further

Description:  How we shape the attitudes of our medical students toward persons with psychiatric problems may be as important as any facts we teach them.  Yet, little research has effectively examined this area.  Several studies have evaluated attitudes before and after clerkships or other educational interventions.  Most of these report that even brief curricular experiences produce positive changes in measures of attitudes.  However, the few follow-up studies published suggest that these shifts may be transient.  These conclusions must be tentative, however, given methodological weaknesses in the work done to date.  This presentation will briefly review this literature, enumerate questions that require further investigation, and discuss methodologies.  In particular, use of cross-sectional versus longitudinal studies, use of control conditions and comparison groups, and choice of (or development of) appropriate outcome measures will be discussed.

Conclusions:  At this time, we have a meager understanding of what types of medical school experiences most effectively enhance, and most significantly impair, the development of compassionate and hopeful understandings of persons with psychiatric illnesses.  Further research using (or developing) effective methods and tools for examining this area is needed.  

 

Plenary

Friday, June 13

10:45 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

An Examination of Medical Student Clerkship

Performance and Psychiatry Rotation Placement

 

Dennis P. McNeilly, Psy.D.

Steven P. Wengel, M.D.

University of Nebraska

 

Educational goals:

1.   To increase awareness of the advantages and disadvantages resulting to medical students from their placement on a particular clinical psychiatry clerkship rotation.

2.   To increase knowledge of those factors that may increase student performance on the psychiatry SHELF exam for medical students and psychiatry clerkship directors.

 

Purpose:  To examine and compare medical student performance on the National Board of Medical Examiners Subject Examination in Psychiatry (the “SHELF” exam) with student exposure to psychiatry patients on four psychiatry clinical services. 

 

Methods:  The SHELF exam scores of 365 third-year medical students who undertook a six-week psychiatry clerkship from 1999-2002 were compared with five independent variables inclusive of the clinical psychiatry clerkship experience.   Analysis of the data compared student  SHELF performance with student and attending gender, student’s age, type of patient exposure during clinical rotation  (child and adolescent, adult, geriatrics, and consultation and liaison), number of patients seen during the clerkship rotation, and the attending faculty rank on the student’s clinical rotation (junior and senior).

 

Results:  Student performance on the psychiatry SHELF exam was found to be significantly correlated with student gender, type of patient exposure, faculty rank.  Number of patients seen by the student, student age, number of students on service and attending gender were not found to be predictive of student performance on the psychiatry SHELF exam. 

 

Conclusions:  The results of the study highlighted the differences among student performance on the SHELF exam following exposure to five different populations of psychiatry patients.  The implications of this study suggest that student gender and age are important factors predictive of student performance on the SHELF exam.  This study may also serve departments of psychiatry and clerkship directors dispel the belief that exposure to a particular psychiatry patient populations are more beneficial than exposure to other psychiatry patient populations.

 

Plenary

Friday, June 13

10:45 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Evaluation of Attitudinal Changes Regarding

Mental Disorders Among Third-Year Medical

Students Following the Psychiatry Clerkship

 

Chrissoula Stavrakaki, M.D., Ph.D.

Clare Gray, M.D.

Alison Freeland, M.D.

Cathy Braidek, M.D.

Rene Ducharme, M.D.

Ginette Goulard, M.D.

Patricia C. Emery, B.A.

 

Educational goals:
1.      Participants will be aware that the psychiatric clerkship experience tends to increase positive attitudes toward psychiatry and the treatment of patients with mental disorders. 
2.      Participant will be aware of some of the aspects of the psychiatric clerkship experience that have a positive impact on students’ attitudes.
Purpose:  The purpose of the present study is to evaluate attitudinal changes vis a vis mental disorders among third-year medical students, and to understand how the psychiatric clerkship affects these attitudes.
Method:  This is a one-year, prospective study employing a questionnaire completed by third-year medical students before and after the psychiatric clerkship. This questionnaire is based on the Medical Conditions Regard Scale (Christison et al., 2002), and was adapted by the team to assess attitudes toward psychiatry and mentally disordered patients. The questionnaire was designed to evaluate the degree to which medical students understand and enjoy working with patients with mental disorders and to what extent they feel they can help produce change within these patients. It also seeks to identify their attitudes and beliefs regarding the treatability of these disorders and the adequacy of services provided. Additionally, it highlights the students’ attitudes toward psychiatry as a specialty vis a vis other medical specialties and their intent to pursue psychiatry as a specialty.

 

One hundred and ten medical students will be asked to anonymously complete the questionnaire before and after the psychiatric clerkship. The data will be analyzed to identify and evaluate any attitudinal changes occurring as a result of the clerkship experience.

Results:  As the study is on-going, complete analyses of the results will be available by May, 2003.   As of December, 2002, pre- and post-clerkship data were available for 15 students. A series of paired t-tests for dependent samples was conducted on pre- and post-clerkship total scores and on each individual item of the modified Medical Condition Regard Scale.   In terms of the pre- and post-clerkship total scores, the results were in the expected direction. Although not statistically significant, the changes in total scores reflected an increase in positive attitudes towards patients with mental disorders and their treatment, going from an average score of 64.13 to 67.94 out of a possible score of 90. In terms of the individual items of the questionnaire, pre- and post-clerkship scores differed significantly on one item: “I can usually find something that helps patients with mental illness feel better” [t(14) = -3.25, p = .006]. Although not statistically significant, the remaining items of the questionnaire were in the expected direction and reflected a more positive view of psychiatry and the treatment of mentally disordered patients. Because these results are based only on the preliminary data from 15 students, it is anticipated that, as more data are gathered, statistical significance may be achieved on more items from the questionnaire, and on the total scores.
Conclusions:  It appears that the psychiatric clerkship experience tends to increase positive attitudes toward psychiatry and the treatment of patients with mental disorders.  However, more data are necessary in order to definitively support this hypothesis. These data are forthcoming.

 

 

 

 

 

Plenary

Friday, June 13

10:45 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Evaluation of Change in Attitudes Before and After a Sophomore Clinical Neuroscience and Third Year Psychiatry Clerkship

 

Nutan Atre-Vaidya, M.D.

Lori E. Moss, M.D.

Finch University of Health Sciences/The Chicago Medical School

Educational goals:  The participants will learn if structured scales can assess medical student attitude towards psychiatric disorders and determine the influence of psychiatric education.

Objectives:

1.   To determine if the medical condition regard scale will be able to measure attitude change towards a disorder after clinical/educational exposure to that disorder.

2.   To assess if greatest degree of change in attitude will occur after the clinical clerkship or after didactic exposure in the preclinical year.

Method:  We distributed a medical condition scale (1) assessing the attitudes of second year medical students towards specific psychiatric and neuropsychiatric disorders including depression, anxiety bipolar disorder and Alzheimer’s disease.  We distributed this scale in the beginning and at the end of the course.  We also distributed the same scale to third year students rotating through psychiatry in the beginning, as well as at the end of the clerkship.
Results:  We will compare the two groups for change in attitude before and after the educational experience.  We will also compare the second and third year students to determine the degree of influence in each year.

 

Reference:              Christison GW, Haviland MG:  How do you tell if your curriculum is altering attitude towards patients.  Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Directors of Medical Student Education in Psychiatry, Key Biscayne, Florida, 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plenary

Friday, June 13

1:00 – 2:15 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

APPROACHES TO TEACHING PSYCHOTHERAPY

 

Nutan Atre-Vaidya, M.D.

Finch University of Health Sciences/The Chicago Medical School

 

Teaching Psychotherapy in Clerkships: 
The Case Against It

 

G. Scott Waterman, M.D.

University of Vermont

 

Educational goals: To describe and discuss reasons why learning psychotherapy should not be an explicit aim of psychiatric clerkships.

 

Description:  Psychiatry is a broad and complex discipline.  Psychiatric clerkships are brief.  Those facts make inevitable the necessity of determining which aspects of our field are fundamental and necessary for all medical students to assimilate, and which are not. 

 

Psychiatrists are experts in the evaluation, diagnosis, classification, etiopathogenesis, natural history, complications, epidemiology, differential diagnosis, and therapy of a group of diseases characterized by abnormalities of emotion, cognition, and/or behavior.  Thus, despite the peculiar tradition of defining psychiatrists according to the type(s) of treatment they typically offer, therapy is but one facet of our specialty, and psychotherapy is a subset of that.  Moreover, in medical education and training, learning about therapies generally comes last, as knowledge of several of the other above-named areas is prerequisite to understanding treatment, which is thus more reasonably the emphasis of senior-year clinical experiences and residency training.

 

If psychotherapy should be taught in psychiatric clerkships, what specifically is it that we should be teaching?  There is now a wide variety of psychotherapies, each with its own theoretical underpinnings, purported indications, techniques, and outcome data.  There remains a tendency in some quarters to treat psychoanalytic/psychodynamic theory and therapy as central to psychiatric thinking and practice, despite its weak evidential foundations and moribund status as psychological theory.  While psychodynamic theory and therapy are of legitimate historical and philosophical interest, the time allotted to psychiatric clerkships is grossly insufficient for the sophisticated treatment the topic would deserve, were it to be part of the curriculum.

 

Finally, it is important to discuss what this argument is not about.  The efficacy of at least some psychotherapies for at least some illnesses is undeniable, and all medical students (and physicians) need to know that.  More broadly, the importance of effective communication, empathy, and understanding of the physician-patient relationship cannot be overemphasized.  But those latter capacities are not synonymous with psychotherapy, nor is learning psychotherapy a necessary or sufficient prerequisite to learning those vital doctoring skills.

 

Conclusions:  There is a great deal of psychiatric knowledge and skill that students must assimilate in order to become effective physicians.  Although psychotherapies are important modalities in the management of psychiatric and other disorders, learning to conduct them is best left to later stages of education and training for those students and physicians who plan to make such treatments part of their clinical work.

 

Plenary

Friday, June 13

1:00 – 2:15 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

Development of a Psychotherapy

Curriculum for Medical Students

 

Ted Feldmann, M.D.

University of Louisville

Educational goals: 

1.      Present a rationale for training medical students in the theories and techniques of psychotherapy

2.      Familiarize psychiatric educators with the components of a psychotherapy curriculum for medical students

3.      Discuss the development of outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of the training program

 

Description:  Psychotherapy training has traditionally been an important component of psychiatry residency programs.  Medical student training in psychotherapy has been more variable in nature.  Time constraints, emphasis on diagnostic issues, and advances in psychopharmacology have limited psychiatric educators in their ability to address psychotherapy training.

 

A basic assumption for this presentation is that familiarity with the theories and techniques of psychotherapy is essential for medical students.  All types of patient encounters, from basic history taking to extended outpatient care, may be viewed as forms of psychotherapy.  Techniques of psychotherapy are utilized not only in psychiatry but in all physician-patient interactions.  Thus, familiarity with basic concepts of psychotherapy (e.g., the unconscious, transference, countertransference, and resistance) are essential for medical students.

 

This presentation outlines a three-year psychotherapy curriculum for medical students.  Basic material on theory and technique of psychotherapy are integrated into the preclinical behavioral science and doctor-patient relationship curriculum.  This material is then built upon during the psychiatry clerkship in the form of a course requirement for completion of psychotherapy with a patient under faculty supervision.  Outcome measures including a case write-up and standardized patient exercise focusing on developing a therapeutic alliance and treatment plan are utilized to measure effectiveness.

 

Plenary

Friday, June 13

1:00 – 2:15 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Teaching Psychotherapy in the

Clerkship Doesn’t Work

 

Myrl Manley, M.D.

New York University

Educational goals: To consider whether psychotherapy should be taught in the psychiatry clerkship, and if so in what manner. 

 

Description:   The tradition of teaching both diseases and therapeutics in medical school is reviewed, and the distinction between knowledge and skills is discussed.  Adequate acquisition of skills requires repeated application over time in a variety of settings.  The psychotherapies are complex sets of skills that cannot meaningfully be mastered in a six to eight week clerkship.  To pretend that students can do psychotherapy devalues the process. 

 

Conclusions:  It is not possible to teach the skills of psychotherapy to medical students, but knowledge of psychotherapies should be part of a general medical education.  A model curriculum on differential therapeutics is offered which includes:  1) recognition of different modalities of therapy,  2) information about basic techniques and theoretical assumptions underlying different modalities,  3)  indications and contraindications for common modalities.  The value and significance of psychotherapy outcome studies is emphasized.  Difficulty in conducting outcome studies—particularly compared to pharmacological studies—is discussed.

Plenary

Friday, June 13

1:00 – 2:15 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Psychodynamics/Psychotherapy in

General Medical Education—

A Thorn in the Side or a Rose in Mufti?

 

Julia Frank, M.D.

George Washington University

 

Educational goals: To clarify the relationship between psychodynamics and patient centered medicine and suggest methods of incorporating psychodynamic and psychotherapeutic concepts into current medical school curricula

 

Description: Medical education currently strives to balance evidence based and patient centered approaches to clinical practice.  Evidence based methods may teach students descriptive psychiatry, including the evaluation of treatment outcome, but they provide an insufficient foundation for interacting with patients in the real world. By contrast, patient centered approaches prepare students for dealing with the human dimensions of patient care. They expropriate many of the principles of psychodynamics, without necessarily acknowledging their source. Psychiatrists can enhance methods of patient centered teaching, and in the process carve out space for psychodynamic concepts in the general curriculum.

 

At GWUSM, psychiatrists have woven the old behavioral science curriculum into problem based learning exercises across years I and II. These cases introduce students to normal child and adult development, principles of stress and coping in adults (understanding the role of cognitions and defenses), cultural variation in dealing with disease and illness, family process, and the nuances of the doctor patient relationship.  Every case provides an example of a core psychodynamic concept needed for effective clinical practice. These concepts include the way that a patient’s prior experiences might shape current behavior or beliefs, the unique meanings that particular illnesses may have for a patient, the unconscious roots of predictable irrational or non compliant behavior  (habits, intentions, defenses, intrapsychic and interpersonal conflicts), and why doctor patient communication goes well or goes wrong (transference/ counter-transference).

 

This effort occurs in parallel with students’ clinical skills curriculum, which emphasizes non-directive, patient- centered interviewing and considerable experience with real patients. During the psychiatry clerkship, students learn to take a  biopsychosocial developmental history along with a symptom focussed one. They are encouraged to formulate their cases as well as diagnose them. Once students begin to recognize the psychodynamic aspects of patient’s presentations—their underlying concerns, developmental stressors, and behavioral problems—the role of psychotherapy becomes comprehensible. A series of case based exercises during the clerkship requires students to learn the assumptions and procedures of brief dynamic therapy, interpersonal therapy, and cognitive therapy as they relate to the cases covered, along with information about outcome, duration and costs of psychotherapy. Students are expected to present a psychotherapy treatment plan to a standardized patient, which requires the student to understand basic psychotherapeutic concepts well enough to explain them to someone else.

 

Students have been taught about the importance of empathy, but this has often been denied them in their own education. The clerkship includes experience with expressive groups, in which students’ own reactions to patients are the topic of discussion. This gives them a small amount of direct experience with the power of putting emotionally charged experience into words in a supportive context (in other words, psychotherapy).

 

Conclusion:   By shaping the patient centered exercises offered to students in pre clinical and clinical settings, psychiatrists can keep the fundamental principles of psychodynamic understanding in the general curriculum. Explicit instruction in patient centered medicine allows students to develop an adequately complex understanding of human behavior and to appreciate the value of psychotherapy as a core modality of treatment. Only a few of our students would be able to describe psychosexual stages, or transference, or the functions of id, ego and superego. But many have learned to map patients’ current stress and coping onto their prior personal experience, to analyze problems of compliance from a relational perspective, and to value various forms of counseling as essential in patient care. 

 

Plenary

Friday, June 13

1:00 – 2:15 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Psychodynamic Psychotherapy

Seminar in the Clerkship:  A Success Story

 

Janis L. Cutler, M.D.

Columbia University

 

Educational goals:  The participant will be aware of a model for exposing medical students to psychodynamic psychotherapy during the psychiatry clerkship.  The participant will be aware of some of the potential advantages of exposing medical students to psychodynamic psychotherapy during the psychiatry clerkship.

 

Description:  A psychodynamic psychotherapy seminar is presented to medical students as part of a required core of seminars during their psychiatry clerkship.  A psychoanalytically trained psychiatrist reviews basic psychodynamic concepts and presents patients, including detailed session material.  The students are actively involved in discussions that include such topics as defense mechanisms, resistance, transference, and countertransference.   The applicability of these concepts and issues to non-psychiatric medical practice is discussed.  The seminar has been extremely well received by the students.

 

Conclusions:  Third year medical students can be receptive to and enthusiastic about exposure to psychodynamic psychotherapy, and such exposure can contribute to their better understanding of the psychology of their patients and to more sophisticated interpersonal skills, irrespective of their specialty choice.

 

Plenary

Saturday, June 14

7:45 – 8:30 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

SPECIAL ADDRESS

 

Chair:  Myrl Manley, M.D.

New York University

 

Impact of Managed Care on Psychiatric

Practice, Or, How I Learned to

Love and Profit From the 15 Minute Interview


Irwin Hassenfeld, M.D.

Albany Medical College

 

Educational goals:  To make the audience aware of some of the hazards and pitfalls of contemporary psychiatric practice in the managed care era.   As a result of this presentation the audience will be able to:
1. Identify 3 significant changes in the practice of psychiatry and their potentially deleterious effects on professional values.
2. Identify 3 ways to mitigate these effects.


Description:  Since 1998 I’ve been working full-time in a community hospital mental health clinic. For the decade prior to 1998 I had done little direct clinical service except for a small selective private practice and periodic emergency back-up. Therefore, it came as quite a shock to experience, first-hand, the profound changes in psychiatric practice under managed care. I felt like the character in Woody Allen’s “Sleeper” who woke up some time in the 21st century, only to discover that everything that used to be bad for you was now good.

I had been taught, and passed it on to medical students and residents whom I taught, the value of the open-ended question in starting an interview. Unlike the close-ended question, it gave patients an opportunity to tell the doctor, right off the bat, about all of the health problems that worry them the most, as well as, anything else that concerned or troubled them. The idea was that this approach would, in the end, save time as the clinician would not have to play “20 questions”. Alas, in the 15 minutes allotted the doctor for each patient, open-ended questions are out of the question. One such question could blow the whole 15 minutes.

Making eye contact with patients was another article of faith. The argument went something as follows: In order for a bond to be established between patient and doctor, sometimes referred to as the therapeutic alliance, empathy must be communicated. An important element in empathic communication is face to face and eye to eye contact. But, seeing patients every 15 minutes back to back makes it necessary to write the progress note during the interview. Eye contact under these conditions is episodic at best and sporadic at worst, unless the doctor is able to write without looking at what is being written, a skill that I have not been able to master. Other cherished practices which had to be jettisoned and which I will discuss include: integrated treatment which has given way to split treatment; the prohibition against poly-pharmacy which is now the norm; and the prohibition against dealing with proprietary hospitals and clinics which are now a prominent part of the health care system. I will also discuss the impact of these developments on medical education.

A relatively new feature of hospital and clinic practice, which is troublesome and potentially corrupting, is the “productivity model” in which salaries are supplemented, depending upon the number of patients seen beyond a predetermined quota. I will report on a small study which I did comparing my own practice profile before and after the institution of a productivity model in the clinic.


Conclusions:  Despite all of these changes and restrictions in psychiatric practice, I have found small ways, that I will share, to bootleg a little psychotherapy, to reduce poly-pharmacy, and to monitor and lower my corruption index.


Plenary

Saturday, June 14

8:30 – 9:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

ASSESSMENT, PART II: 

SYSTEMS OF ASSESSMENT

 

Martin Leamon, M.D.

University of California, Davis

 

Clerkship Length: Assessment and Academic Issues

 

Renate Rosenthal, Ph.D.

University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis

 

 

Introduction:  Psychiatry Core Clerkships in LCME accredited medical schools vary in length.  This study, part of a larger survey, aimed at assessing how clerkship length affects student evaluation procedures, and how satisfied clerkship directors are with the amount of time allotted to them.

 

Educational goals:

1.      To learn how clerkships of varying lengths handle student evaluations

2.      To learn about various clerkship structures across LCME schools

 

Description:  Questionnaires were sent to all Psychiatry clerkship directors of LCME approved medical schools. 109 questionnaires were returned. 19% of clerkships were four weeks, 50% were six weeks, 19% lasted eight weeks, and 11% described their time as “other.” Only 6% of the six-week clerkships were combined with other disciplines, while 24% of both the four-week and eight-week clerkships were combined with other programs in some manner. Only 15% of clerkships had a block of two full months devoted only to Psychiatry.

 

All directors of the eight-week group felt the clerkship length was adequate. 96% of the six-week and 86% of the four-week group also felt they had enough time.

The majority felt their evaluations reflected the learning objectives. Most programs used the NBME exam (77% of 4 four-week programs, 74% of six-week programs, and 83% of eight-week programs). OSCEs were used by 14% of four-week and eight-week programs, and by 20% of the six-week programs. The latter group also relied more on direct observation as an assessment tool, (29%), as compared to 14% of the four-week and 10% of the eight-week groups. Only one (5%) of the four-week programs had oral exams, as compared to 24% of the six-week, and 42% of the eight-week programs. 14% of the four-week, 18% of the six-week, and 29% of the eight-week programs used logbooks.

 

These results indicate that, although the freestanding eight-week clerkship has become a distinct minority, most clerkship directors seem to perceive the length of their clerkships as fairly adequate. The majority used the NBME exam as one of the assessment tools.

 

According to recently published norms by the NBME*, students with four-week and six-week clerkships perform at least as well as students with longer clerkships on that exam. This raises the question whether students with short clerkships have a more intense and organized didactic experience, whether they study harder, or whether they learn (and retain) significant additional Psychiatry content outside of the clerkship, perhaps in the first two years of medical school. These questions will require further study.

 

 

 

 


Plenary

Saturday, June 14

8:30 – 9:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Combined Clerkships

 

Kathleen Clegg, M.D.

University Hospitals of Cleveland

.

Educational goals:

1.      Participants will be aware of the degree of educational benefit reported by clerkship directors regarding combined clerkships as opposed to the traditional free standing clerkship. 

2.      Participants will be aware of the administrative difficulties that clerkship directors felt interfered with the effectiveness of the combined clerkship as an educational experience.

3.      Factors affecting the decision to pursue and maintain combined clerkships will be discussed.

Background:  There has been a trend in recent years in medical education, to combine or merge clerkships in the third year of medical school.  This has been especially true of the psychiatry clerkship.  In a recent comprehensive survey of psychiatry clerkship directors, the frequency and structure of combined clerkship programs were addressed.  In addition, the attitudes of responders, both in clerkships that are ‘free standing’ psychiatry clerkships and combined clerkships were compared.
Methods:  The questionnaire was sent to all psychiatry clerkship directors at US and Canadian medical schools.  110 responses were received.
Results:  18.2% of clerkship directors responding (N=110) replied that they had a combined clerkship at their medical school.  88.2% of those who indicated that they had a combined clerkship said the clerkship was combined with neurology, 5.9% with Internal Medicine, and 5.9% with Family Practice.  55% of the combined clerkships were “combined but not merged.”  The other 45% were merged but only 15% with common evaluation. The specifics of what constitutes a combined vs. merged clerkship were not differentiated.

 

Regarding attitudes, 9.9% of all responders (both combined and free standing) agreed or strongly agreed that “the combination clerkship provides an educational benefit compared to the traditional psychiatry clerkship.”  57.2% of all responders disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement, while 33% were neutral.  Among responders with combined clerkships, 68.4 % either strongly disagreed, disagreed or were neutral about  whether there is an educational benefit to the combined clerkship.  57.9% of responders with a combined clerkship agreed or strongly agreed with the belief that “the combination clerkship creates administrative difficulties that interfere with it’s effectiveness as an educational experience.” Positive and negative narrative comments about the combined clerkships will be discussed in this session.

Discussion:  A growing number of clerkships have experimented with a combined clerkship, primarily with neurology.  It was not clear from the data collected what constituted a merged clerkship as opposed to a combined clerkship. Less than 10% of all responders felt the combined clerkship offered an educational benefit over the traditional free standing clerkship.  68.4% of responders in combined programs did not feel there was an educational benefit and 57.9% responders in combined programs felt administrative difficulties interfered with it’s effectiveness as an educational experience.

 

The survey did not separate out evaluation strategies or remediation strategies specific to combined clerkships.  This would most certainly be an area for further research.

 

Given this widely perceived lack of educational benefit and excessive administrative burden, factors affecting the decision to pursue and maintain combined clerkships will be discussed.

 


Plenary

Saturday, June 14

8:30 – 9:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

Psychiatry Clerkship Usage of the NBME Subject Exam
Ruth E. Levine M.D.
The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston
Educational goals:  By the end of this presentation, the learner will:

 

1.      Be knowledgeable about the extent of usage of the NBME examination in psychiatric clerkships.

2.      Understand the ways that different clerkships use the NBME examination in determining their overall clerkship grade.

3.      Be aware of the various methods utilized by clerkships to remediate failure of the NBME examination.

 

Background:  In recent years an increasing number of clerkships have been including the National Board of Medical Examiners Subject Examination in Psychiatry as a tool for assessing students. There are no “established” standards or guidelines  regarding proper usage of the examination. To determine the extent to which the examination is used, reasons for its usage, and methods for converting it into a grade, a number of questions regarding the NBME examination were included on a survey that was sent to Clerkship directors throughout the U.S. and Canada.

 

Method: A comprehensive questionnaire surveying methods of evaluation and remediation was sent to 150 clerkship directors in the United States and Canada. The survey was anonymous, and self-addressed stamped envelopes were included for return. Two mailings were distributed, and clerkship directors were contacted by phone to encourage compliance. 

 

Results: 111 questionnaires were returned. 65% of respondents reporting using the NBME exam. Of these, all but 4 schools incorporate the exam into their overall grade. The majority of schools use it to count for between 20% and 50% of the overall grade, with the largest number (23%) having it count 25%. There is no predominant mode of converting the score into a grade--  38% of users convert the subject score; 42% of users convert the percentile score; and 20% of users use another method.  There is a wide range of what is considered  a “passing” score. Among those who use the subject score, passing ranges from 50 to 75 with a mean passing score of 58.3 and a median passing score of 58. Among those who use the percentile score, the mean passing score was the 12th percentile and the median was the 11th percentile. The majority of respondents who use the exam (75%) remediate failures by having students retake the exam. Other methods for remediation include taking an alternative exam, or redoing all or part of the clerkship. A number of different reasons for using the NMBE examination were acknowledged, the most common of which was “it is a good way of comparing students.”  90.7% of respondents believed the exam was a good measure of knowledge base. Clerkship directors were split regarding whether or not it was a good measure of clinical skills, and most clerkship directors disagreed with the statement “the NBME exam is a good measure of professional attitude.”

 

Discussion: The majority of clerkships in the U.S. and Canada use the NMBE examination as an assessment tool. Most clerkship directors believe the exam is a good measure of knowledge base, and a good way to compare students. There is no predominant method for converting the score into a grade. There is also considerable disparity in terms of the weight that the examination is given when determining  the overall clerkship grade.  Most students who fail the exam are required to retake the exam as part of remediation.

 

 

 


Plenary

Saturday, June 14

8:30 – 9:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

Clerkship Evaluation and Remediation

 

David L. Carlson, M.D.

University of North Dakota

 

Background:  Constructing clerkship evaluation systems that are fair and reliable is a challenge.  Knowledge of how other schools structure their systems can help stimulate new ideas as well as support current efforts. 

 

This study attempted to determine current student assessment patterns within psychiatry clerkships by looking at the evaluation tools being utilized and how these fit into an overall evaluation process.  Further we were interested in determining how students who fail current evaluation tools are required to remediate such failures and what behaviors or deficits can lead to clerkship failure.  We hope to provide information that will help guide clerkship directors as they reassess and structure their evaluation and remediation systems.

Educational goals:

1.      Be knowledgeable about how students are assessed in psychiatry clerkships.

2.      Be familiar with clerkship director views on how well various assessment modes measure expected clinical knowledge, expected clinical skills, and expected professional attitude development.

3.      Be aware of the types of remediation utilized when students fail assessments.

4.      Be familiar with behaviors and deficiencies that can lead to clerkship failure.

 

Method:   Anonymous questionnaires were mailed to psychiatry clerkship programs at all accredited U.S. (125) and Canadian (16) allopathic medical schools.   A first mailing was sent in November, 2001, and second mailing was sent in February, 2002. 

 

Results:  111 questionnaires were returned.  20% of respondents were from four week programs, 50% were from six week programs, 19% were from eight week programs, and 11% described their time as “other”.  18% were combined with another discipline, and 88% of combined programs noted neurology as the other discipline. 

 

The three most frequently used evaluation components were:  evaluation by attendings (90%), NBME exam (75%), and department exams (37%).  The average (mean) contributions to the overall clerkship grade by these evaluations were:  clinical evaluations – 54% (median 50%, range 10-100%); NBME exam – 31% (median 25%, range 0-100%); department exam – 22% (median 20%, range 0-50).

 

Average (mean) passing score on the NBME for schools utilizing the subject (raw) score was 59 (median 58, range 50-75).  Average (mean) passing for those utilizing a percentile score was the 12th percentile (median 11th percentile, range 2nd-25th).  Most schools use the subject score (2.5 times those using the percentile number).

 

The most highly rated measures of expected clinical knowledge were the department exam (51% “strongly” endorse), NBME exam (41% “strongly” endorse), and oral exams (34% “strongly” endorse).  When combining “strongly agree” with “agree” these three evaluation components were nearly equal at 90% for department exam and 91% for both NBME exam and oral exams. 

The most highly rated measures of expected clinical skills were direct observation (53% “strongly” endorse, 98% endorse), clinical evaluations (39% “strongly” endorse, 93% endorse), and OSCE exams (46% “strongly” endorse, 90% endorse.

 

The most highly rated measures of expected professional attitude development were clinical evaluations (44% “strongly” endorse, 94% endorse), direct observation (42% “strongly” endorse, 92% endorse), and oral exams (20% “strongly” endorse, 73% endorse). 

 

Overall 45% of programs tailored remediation depending upon circumstances of failure, 41% had a standard method of remediation but would occasionally tailor based upon circumstances, and 14% of programs always used the same methods of remediation. 

 

The clinical evaluation by attending, the most frequently used and scored evaluation component, was the component most likely to require a repeat of the entire clerkship if failed (41%).  Another 40% would require redoing a portion of the clerkship.  The NBME exam, the next most used and scored evaluation component, rarely required a repeat of the clerkship if failed (4%).  Another 7% would require redoing a portion of the clerkship.  78% would require retaking another NBME exam. The department exam, a distant third in usage and scoring, would lead to retaking the entire clerkship by only 3% of programs using this exam.  Another 9% would require redoing a portion of a clerkship.  66% would require retaking another department exam or similar evaluation. 

 

Most programs related that a breach of ethical or expected professional behavior could lead to immediate clerkship failure.

 

Conclusions:  The attending clinical evaluation is still the assessment method of choice for measuring clinical skills and professional attitude development.  It is used more frequently (90% of clerkships) and given more weight (around 50% of grade) than any other assessment tool.  Failing this evaluation had the highest likelihood of requiring a repeat of the clerkship.  Further studies are needed, however, to assess the frequency and nature of failure on clinical evaluations as well as how such assessments go about measuring clinical skills and professional attitude. 

 

The NBME and department exams complement the overall process by providing better data on clinical knowledge, though the NBME exam is favored over and generally weighted higher than department exams.  Both received significant negative ratings as measures of professional attitude development; and the NBME exam was rated negatively for measuring clinical skills while opinion was divided for department exams on this.  Failure on these evaluations was more likely to require a retake of a similar exam.

 

OSCE evaluations are still emerging, and ratings and usage patterns will need to be reassessed in a couple years’ time. 

 

Overall a significant majority (82%) of directors report their particular system of evaluation of clerks reflects the learning objectives of the clerkship.

 


Plenary

Saturday, June 14

8:30 – 9:45 a.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

Performance Based Assessment in a Psychiatry Clerkship

 

James Springer, Ed.D.

Christopher Colenda, M.D., M.P.H.

Robert Strung, M.D.

David Dunstone, M.D.

Michigan State University

 

Educational goals:

 

1.      Attendees will learn about the experiences of one Department of Psychiatry in creating a Performance Based Assessment for clerkship students

2.      Participants will examine the standardized rating scale for the PBA 

3.      Attendees will examine data that indicates the PBA tests different domains of performance than do other standard measures

 

Description:  Formative and summative evaluation of student performance in psychiatry clerkships typically involves the use of structured, objective examinations, preceptor or supervisor evaluations of clinical performance, and some type of written paper, case study, or comprehensive patient evaluation.  While these methods measure knowledge of psychopathology, generalized treatment approaches, psychopharmacology, epidemiology, and performance in clinics or on psychiatric units, they do not assess elements of the diagnostic interview of establishment of an effective patient/physician relationship. This paper describes Michigan State University’s College of Human Medicine’s Department of Psychiatry’s efforts to create formative evaluations of clinical interviewing, case presentations, and clinical problem solving that are accomplished across its community campuses.

 

After several revisions, the final approach to the Performance Based Assessment (PBA) mirrored, to some extent, the oral board examination for psychiatric certification.  It consisted of face-to-face interviews with “real” patients chosen by the Community Clerkship Director.  The evaluation included a 30-minute interview followed by a case presentation and treatment planning.  A faculty evaluator provided feedback immediately.  A standardized instrument was developed to measure critical components of the examination and presentation.

 

Results:

 

Table 1.  Performance Based Assessment (PBA) and Other Measures of Performance

 

Correlation

PBA Total – NBME Exam Score

0.065

PBA Total Score – Honors in Clerkship

0.061

PBA Total Score—Community

0.019

 

Table 2.  PBA Scores

 

Correlation

Communication – Data Collection Skills

0.271

Communication – Presentation Skills

0.468

Data Collection – Presentation Skills

0.375

 

To date 275 College of Human Medicine students have taken the Department of Psychiatry’s Performance Based Assessment.  While data is still being collected, preliminary findings indicate that students from each of the community campuses do well on the PBA.  This is in spite of having differing clinical placement sites, variable lecture topics, and exposure to different patient populations.  Pass rates have been consistently high across the campuses with no one community showing outliers for higher rates of students receiving failing ratings.

 

Conclusions:  Student performance on the PBA is not strongly correlated with other student evaluation measures, suggesting that the PBA is successful in measuring different and distinct elements of student performance.  As we were concerned that there would be confounding among the different evaluation methods for students (e.g., good students would score well on all evaluation measures), these data indicate that we are testing different domains of clinical performance.

 

While it was anticipated that there might be some difficulty in finding patient volunteers for this experience, this has not been an issue.  Student acceptance has been high, possibly because College of Human Medicine students are familiar with observed and videotaped interviews, having completed several during the pre-clinical curriculum.  Students have commented favorably on the opportunity for professional interaction with a faculty member with whom they had not previously worked.  Feedback from faculty indicate that in addition to being able to formulate an impression of interviewing skills, psychiatric knowledge, case presentation skills, and clinical decision-making abilities, the PBA is able to provide some assessment of professional behavior as well.

 

Workshop

Saturday, June 14

10:00 – 11:15 a.m.

Wapiti 1

 

Using Interactive Multimedia Tools to
Enhance Educational Efficacy
Jaskanwar S. Batra, M.D.
G. Scott Waterman, M.D.
University of Vermont
Educational goals:

1.      Participants will view a case-based multimedia presentation and consider the possibility of using such tools as adjuncts to traditional textbooks.

2.      Participants will learn how to develop these presentations using widely available software such as Microsoft PowerPoint and Adobe Acrobat.

 

Description:  As teachers in the twenty-first century, we have progressed considerably from the time when lectures were the sole form of teaching.  The use of transparencies and blackboards has for many of us given way to the use of PowerPoint slides.  Textbooks have evolved from simple typewritten documents to include sophisticated graphics and color photographs.  We now have available to us another medium to help us teach medicine to our students – the World Wide Web.  Recent advances in technology make it simpler for us to publish our lectures and presentations on the Web.

 

Here at the University of Vermont we have for the past several years been developing a new medical curriculum.   Among its features is an emphasis on using case material to demonstrate examples of common or otherwise important disease entities and clinical situations.  There is also a premium placed on self-learning and professionalism.  In an effort to combine these two aspects of the Vermont Integrated Curriculum, we are developing cases for use in small group discussion settings, which will also be available to students on the Web to re-read and study after the discussion group meetings.  Also on the Web will be a series of questions and answers associated with the cases that will communicate the knowledge associated with the cases whose mastery is expected.  In addition to questions and answers related to the cases, there will also be videos and images whose purpose is to supplement the verbal information imparted.   These learning modules will communicate information that could be found in textbooks and seen on videos, and they will do so in an interactive fashion that will make them enjoyable, readily available, easy to search, and more effective.

In this presentation we will help teachers develop these types of multimedia, interactive tutorials that can be available to students at all times.  We will discuss and demonstrate how to use simple, familiar, widely available, easy-to-learn software such as Microsoft PowerPoint and Adobe Acrobat to produce teaching modules that can easily be published on the Web for students to use whenever and however often they wish.  We will show how to use the more advanced features of Microsoft PowerPoint and easy ways to incorporate audio clips, pictures and videos.  We will show how to make presentations more interactive, and we will demonstrate the use of Adobe Acrobat to publish them on the Web such that a non-authorized user cannot modify them.

 

Workshop

Saturday, June 14

10:00 – 11:15 a.m.

Moose 2

 

 

Cultural Assessment in Clinical Psychiatry:

A Method to Teach Cultural Competence

 

Francis G. Lu, M.D.

University of California, San Francisco

 

Educational goals:

1)     To understand the 2 LCME standards on cultural competence.

2)     To understand how the DSM-IV Outline for Cultural Formulation can be useful to teach cultural competence.

 

Description:  Medical school curricula must now meet June 2002 LCME requirements “to document objectives relating to the development of skills in cultural competence.”  These standards are:  1) The faculty and students must demonstrate an understanding of the manner in which people of diverse cultures and belief systems perceive health and illness and respond to various symptoms, diseases, and treatments; 2) Medical students must learn to recognize and appropriately address gender and cultural biases in themselves and others, and in the process of health care delivery.

 

The DSM-IV Outline for Cultural Formulation (pages 843-844) provides a concise clinical tool for cultural assessment.  It consists of 5 sections:  1) Cultural Identity, 2) Cultural Expressions and Explanations of Illness, 3) Cultural Stressors and Supports, 4) Cultural Elements of the Clinician-Patient Relationship, 5) Overall Cultural Assessment for Differential Diagnosis and Treatment Planning.

Two sections of “The Culture of Emotions” videotape that relate to the 2 LCME standards will be shown;they are the “cultural expressions and explanations of illness” and “cultural elements of the clinician-patient relationship.”  (The tape is an introductory overview of the Outline.  After a short prologue, the five sections are described; after each section, there are short commentaries from 23 multicultural experts.)

 

References:

Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry. Cultural Assessment in Clinical Psychiatry. Washington, DC; American Psychiatric Publishing, 2002.

Koskoff, H. The Culture of Emotions.  Boston, MA. Fanlight Productions, 2002.

 

Workshop

Saturday, June 14

10:00 – 11:15 a.m.

Wapiti 2

 

 

 

(Down-to-earth) Reviewers’ Workshop: 

Reviewing Manuscripts for Publication

 

Laura Weiss Roberts, M.D.

University of New Mexico

John Coverdale, M.D.

Baylor School of Medicine

Alan Louie, M.D.

University of California, San Francisco

Academic Psychiatry

 

Educational goals:  This workshop is a down-to-earth, hands-on introduction to the essential skills of reviewing manuscripts for publication in peer-reviewed academic medical journals.

 

Methods: The workshop leaders will provide an overview of the “anatomy” of a helpful peer review.   In helping participants to build their reviewing skills, the importance of peer-review as a generative, collegial activity of importance to colleagues and the profession will be discussed. Special advanced topics such as serving as a guest editor will be introduced.  This workshop will involve interactive learning and Q and A formats, and it will have a tone of warmth and collegiality.   Up-to-date resource materials will be provided to all participants.  

 

Results:  This workshop is aimed at enhancing the skills of early and middle career academic psychiatrists who serve as peer reviewers for journals.  It will also be valuable for more senior faculty who serve as mentors, senior authors, and guest editors.

 

Conclusions:  Psychiatric educators may receive benefit from activities which enhance and expand their skill set and prepare them for the tasks of careers in academic psychiatry.

 

Workshop

Saturday, June 14

10:00 – 11:15 a.m.

Antelope 2

 

 

 

Be Your Own Spielberg:  The Nuts and

Bolts of Home Digital Video Production

 

Robert Boland, M.D.

Brown University

 

Educational objectives: at the end of this workshop, the participant will be able to:

1)     convert movie from videotape to computer (digital) video

2)     edit that video into a polished product

3)     output the computer video to a variety of presentation formats, including videotape, CD-Rom, web-based formats and DVD 

 

Description:  Teachers are increasing using such digital video as a teaching tool.  Presentations of various uses for such video are becoming common.  Such presentations generally focus on the implementation of video.  As these presentations demonstrate, there are advantages to the use of digital video over older formats. 

 

However, educators without technical expertise (or an A-V department at their disposal) are left to marvel at these end results, feeling that such techniques are beyond reach. This is unfortunate, as the increasing power and storage capacity of computers has made inexpensive digital home video production a reality for anyone. 

 

This presentation will show how digital videos are made.  This will be a hands-on interactive presentation.  In the time allowed, we will be able to follow video production from start to finish.  We will (1) create a short film on videotape, (2) convert it to computer video, (3) edit the video into a polished production, using transitions, titling, and superimposed overlays, and (4) convert this computer video to a variety of formats that could be used in the classroom: videotape, CD-ROM, a format suited for web-based delivery, and a DVD-compatible format.  The benefits and limitations of each format (resolution, screen size, compression and file size, etc.) will be discussed.

 

All this will be done using commonly available equipment: primarily a home video camera and a laptop computer that has a CD burner.  The software programs that will be used will all be consumer-level software, many of which are shareware, freeware, or have trial or “lite” versions that are affordable for all, and information on and/or samples of such software will be made available. 

 

Plenary

Saturday, June 14

11:15  a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

NEW DIRECTIONS AND NEW ROLES

 

Darlene Shaw, Ph.D., Chair

Medical University of South Carolina

 

Psychiatric Medical Student Education within the

University of Rochester Double Helix Curriculum

 

Linda Ryan, M.D.

Jeffrey M. Lyness, M.D.

Ralph Jozefowicz, M.D.

Kerry O’Bannion, Ph.D.

Elaine Dannefer, Ph.D.

University of Rochester

Educational goals:

1.      Describe the Psychiatry Clerkship within the University of Rochester’s (U of R’s) fully integrated clinical and basic science Double Helix Curriculum (DHC).

2.      Compare third year medical student NBME exam performance based on completion of the traditional clerkship versus the DHC block.

3.      Explore the differences in student feedback regarding the clerkship experience.

Background and methods:  The educational goal of the DHC is integration of basic science and clinical medicine throughout the four-year medical school curriculum. To meet this goal, a third year block pairing psychiatry and neurology has been developed which emphasizes the many areas these disciplines share, while respecting the need for specialty-based clinical experiences.  During this 10-week Mind, Brain Behavior II (MBBII) course, students complete 4 weeks of clinical psychiatry, 4weeks of clinical neurology, and then two weeks of an Advanced Basic Science curriculum.

 

To facilitate psychiatry/neurology interdisciplinary themes, several didactic activities are held jointly with the entire MBBII student cohort. For example, Joint Neurology/Psychiatry case conferences take place twice per block and allow for in-depth discussion of a case from both psychiatric and neurological perspectives.  An end of life/palliative care conference affords an opportunity to explore ethical issues in a case-based format.  An 8-week didactic series of core neurology and psychiatry seminars also brings the full group of students together one afternoon per week. Lastly, the fully integrated Advanced Basic Science portion explores clinical neuroscience via PBL sessions, case conferences, lectures and laboratory sessions. 

 

The class of 2003 completed the first cycle of the third-year DHC during the 2001-2002 academic year.  Ninety students from this class took the NBME subject exam in psychiatry.  Exam scores were compared to the previous “traditional” class. Additionally, all students completed an evaluation of the clerkship experience.  The overall clerkship quality score derives from a feedback questionnaire that uses a 1 – 5 scale (1 = needs much improvement, 5 = excellent).  Students rated these areas: academic and clinical experience, clerkship organization, and communication of course goals and objectives.  Overall class of 2003 psychiatry clerkship ratings   were compared to the previous year. Results are shown as mean (SD).  The NBME shelf exam national mean for 2001-2002 and the neurology and basic science student ratings are also included. 

Results:  The mean (SD) University of Rochester raw score on the NBME psychiatry exam was 72.7 (7.7) for the class of 2003 (2001-2002 clerkship year) compared to 73.1(9.0) for the class of 2002 (2000-2001 clerkship year), a difference that was not significant (p = 0.75).  By comparison, the national psychiatry mean score for 2001-2002 was 73.8(8.7).  The overall quality of the psychiatry portion of the MBBII clerkship rated a mean score of 4.05(.84) for 2001-2002 compared to3.93 for 2000-2001(p=0.25). The 2001-2002 Neurology portion achieved a mean rating of 4.22(.83) and the Advanced Basic Science block 3.13(1.05).  
Conclusion:  There was no significant difference in psychiatry NBME exam scores or clerkship ratings between the years 2001-2002 and 2000-2001. This result may reflect a lack of curricular impact, or more likely, is related to a number of confounding factors.  These may include differences in class composition and potential inability of the NBME subject exam to accurately measure the U of R curriculum learning objectives.  Despite these and other limitations, exam scores remain close to the national mean.  Also, student ratings for all three components of the MBBII course are favorable.  Future reviews will include data from the comprehensive exams administered prior to third year and the end of fourth year.  This information, in addition to narrative comments will allow for ongoing internal review and subsequent modifications of the clerkship.

 

 

Plenary

Saturday, June 14

11:15  a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

 

 

The University of Pennsylvania Mental Health

Outreach Task Force: A Case Study of Psychiatry Educator Involvement in University Life

 

Anthony L. Rostain, M.D.

University of Pennsylvania

Educational goals:

1.      To describe the involvement of one psychiatry educator in addressing his university’s efforts to promote mental health.

2.      To stimulate discussion among ADMSEP members about getting involved in campus mental health promotion activities

 

Participants will be able to:

1.      Identify steps for getting involved with university mental health promotion activities

2.      Discuss strategies for making resources available to teach about mental health and mental illness in the university setting, and to foster greater awareness of and sensitivity to mental health issues affecting college and university students

Description:  Psychiatry educators are often called upon to offer strategies and provide technical support to student affairs deans, advisors, counselors and other University officials regarding mental health services for students.  Recently, in response to several high profile student suicides, the Provost of the University of Pennsylvania asked me to head up a Mental Health Outreach Task Force to consider ways that the University could facilitate early identification of students experiencing psychological distress, improve access to counseling and psychological services, and reduce the stigma surrounding mental health.  The Task Force met over a seven-month period and presented the Provost with a series of recommendations to address these concerns.  This presentation will outline the key process issues and developmental steps involved in convening and directing the Task Force.  It will also summarize its key findings and recommendations, many of which have been implemented.

Conclusions:  Psychiatry educators can be extremely helpful in advancing mental health awareness and extending psychiatric outreach efforts at colleges and universities.  While strategies will differ from setting to setting, involving key participants in the planning process can help to catalyze changes that de-stigmatize mental disorders and make it more acceptable for students to seek help.  It is hoped that this case study will encourage other psychiatry educators to undertake similar activities at their own institutions. 

 

Plenary

Saturday, June 14

11:15  a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

“Audience of One:” A New

Student Support Service

 

Renate Rosenthal, Ph.D.

Sandra Kaplan, B.A.

University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis

 

Educational goals:

1.      To learn about the creation of an innovative student support service, including recruitment and selection of volunteers

2.      To learn about the role of the Director of Medical Student Education in creating this service (boundaries, potential conflicts, potential benefits)

3.      To learn about the process of mentoring this kind of service, step-by-step, from its inception to the third year of its existence

4.      To learn about strategies for triage of acutely ill students, or students who need professional, rather than volunteer assistance

5.      To learn about confidentiality issues, and how they are being handled

6.      To stimulate discussion about the role of counseling/psychotherapy in medical education

 

Description:  Like most schools, the College of Medicine at the University of Tennessee has a professional Student Mental Health service, readily available and free of charge to the student, via heavily discounted fees. It is still, however, a Psychiatric Service. Students are fearful that this type of contact will go on their record and follow them around.  Consequently, medical students are reluctant to use this service for issues they consider “minor.” They often seek professional help only when their personal or academic situation has deteriorated significantly.

 

In January of 2000, a “second-career” medical student, a former Nurse-Practitioner, needed to design and execute a Community Project to satisfy the requirements of a class. She felt there was a need for a confidential student support service, run by peers.  She wanted to fulfill this need as her community project. She asked the Psychiatry Clerkship Director to help her design such a service, and to serve as the faculty sponsor and mentor of the organization.

This was the beginning of “Audience of One.” In 2001/02, AOO logged more than 60 counseling contacts. The vast majority did not require referral for professional help.

 

The consensus among volunteers and counselees is that this has been an extremely positive experience all around. It now is under the umbrella of the Office of Student Affairs. 

 

For more information, including volunteer profiles, please visit the AOO website at http://www.utmem.edu/AOO/AudienceOfOne.html

 

Plenary

Saturday, June 14

11:15  a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Explorers’ Room

 

All-Ambulatory Psychiatry Clerkship
 in Community Mental Health
Tamara L. Gay, M.D.
Patricia Santy, M.D.
Karen Milner, M.D.
University of Michigan

Educational goals: 

1.   To provide a model for outpatient clerkship development, with accompanying preliminary results from the first year.

2.   To highlight the important role of student choice in actual clinical assignments at a community mental health center.

 

Description:  At the University of Michigan in April 2001, we piloted our first all ambulatory 3rd year clerkship at our affiliated Community Mental Health Center (CMH).  Our goal was to develop community psychiatry rotation that allowed students to gain experience in a variety of clinical settings and to see a broad spectrum of patients.  An implied objective was to ensure that students completing this rotation will approach patients with severe and persistent mental illness with less anxiety.

 

This required clerkship is unique among all other at the University of Michigan, in that each student chooses from “core clinical sites” and “optional clinical sites,” to form their own individualized clerkship template.  This choice component has been widely praised by almost every student, as it appears to actively engage them in the learning process.  Some of the clinical requirements are listed as follows:

1.      One half-day block per week in the psychiatric emergency room.

2.      Three half-day “core” experiences per week

3.      (choosing from 8 core offerings).

4.      Three or more half-day “optional” experiences over the 4 weeks

5.      (choosing from 5 offerings).

 

Conclusions:  Performance data, such as shelf examination scores comparing CMH students with students at other sites, has been collected.  The mean shelf score of the CMH students is approximately 1.5 points higher than the mean from other sites.  Data analysis will be calculated looking for statistical significance.