Abstract
Objective
Integration of basic and clinical science is a key component of medical education reform, yet best practices have not been identified. The authors compared two methods of basic and clinical science integration in the psychiatry clerkship.
Methods
Two interventions aimed at integrating basic and clinical science were implemented and compared in a dementia conference: flipped curriculum and coteaching by clinician and physician-scientist. The authors surveyed students following each intervention. Likert-scale responses were compared.
Results
Participants in both groups responded favorably to the integration format and would recommend integration be implemented elsewhere in the curriculum. Survey response rates differed significantly between the groups and student engagement with the flipped curriculum video was limited.
Conclusions
Flipped curriculum and co-teaching by clinician and physician-scientist are two methods of integrating basic and clinical science in the psychiatry clerkship. Student learning preferences may influence engagement with a particular teaching format.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Flexner A. Medical education in the United States and Canada: a report to the Carnegie Foundation for the advancement of teaching. New York: The Carnegie Foundation; 1910. Bulletin No. 4.
D’Eon MF. Knowledge loss of medical students on first year basic science courses at the University of Saskatchewan. BMC Med Educ. 2006;6:5.
Ling Y, Swanson DB, Holtzman K, Bucak SD. Retention of basic science information by senior medical students. Acad Med. 2008;83(10 suppl):S82–5.
Irby DM, Cooke M, O’Brien BC. Calls for reform of medical education by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: 1910 and 2010. Acad Med. 2010;85(2):220–7.
Woods NN, Neville AJ, Levinson AJ, Howey EH, Oczkowski WJ, Norman GR. The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis. Acad Med. 2006;81(10 suppl):S124–7.
Bandiera G, Boucher A, Neville A, Kuper A, Hodges B. Integration and timing of basic sciences education. Med Teach. 2013;35(5):381–7.
Finnerty EP, Chauvin S, Bonaminio G, Andrews M, Carroll RG, Pangaro LN. Flexner revisited: the role and value of the basic sciences in medical education. Acad Med. 2010;85:349–55.
Wiener CM, Thomas PA, Goodspeed E, Valle D, Nichols DG. “Genes to society”—the logic and process of the new curriculum for the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Acad Med. 2010;85:498–506.
Eisenstein A, Vaisman L, Johnston-Cox H, Gallan A, Shaffer K, Vaughan D, et al. Integration of basic science and clinical medicine: the innovative approach of the cadaver biopsy project at the Boston University School of Medicine. Acad Med. 2014;89(1):50–3.
Sakles JC, Maldonado RJ, Kumari VG. Integration of basic science and clinical sciences in a clerkship: a pilot study. J Int Assoc Med Sci Educ. 2006;16:4–9.
Spencer AL, Brosenitch T, Levine AS, Kanter SL. Back to the basic sciences: an innovative approach to teaching senior medical students how best to integrate basic science and clinical medicine. Acad Med. 2008;83:662–9.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge Drs. Carl Edelen and David Russell for their teaching contributions and Dr. Jessica Gold for her review of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosures
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wilkins, K.M., Moore, D., Rohrbaugh, R.M. et al. Integration of Basic and Clinical Science in the Psychiatry Clerkship. Acad Psychiatry 41, 369–372 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-016-0640-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-016-0640-x