Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Disease-Based Approach to the Vertical and Horizontal Integration of a Medical Curriculum

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As medical disciplines have become increasingly interdisciplinary and evidenced-based medicine is widely practiced, there is a need for curricula that reflect these changes. The newly revised Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) standards 1.1 Strategic Planning and Continuous Quality Improvement and 8.3 Curricular Design, Review, Revision/Content Monitoring require ongoing curricular review to assure accreditation compliancy. We have completed a comprehensive review of our curriculum and have moved from a discipline-based curriculum to that of one that focuses on a systems/disease-based model. The approach allows for a more horizontally integrated curriculum in the preclinical years, while the use of 115 distinct diseases and 8 themes creates a quality assurance mechanism that allows for tracking of vertical integration across the entire curriculum. The first step in the development of this quality assurance model was to establish and empower a newly formed integration subcommittee. This subcommittee was tasked with developing a model to review, track, and improve the horizontal and vertical integration of the curriculum. Our integrated curriculum is now in its second year having completed the initial identification of gaps and redundancies through a process that relies on the mapping of diseases and themes throughout the courses. This ongoing review and evaluation mechanism has created a dynamic quality assurance process that allows our faculty to address issues of both horizontal and vertical integration of our curriculum at the course level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Christakis NA. The similarity and frequency of proposals to reform US medical education. Constant concerns. JAMA. 1995;274(9):706–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME). Functions and structure of a medical school: standards for accreditation of medical education programs leading to the MD degree. 2013. Retrieved from: https://www.lcme.org/publications/functions.pdf.

  3. General Medical Council (GMC). Update: standards for curricula and assessment systems. 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.gmc-uk.org/Standards_for_curricula_and_assessment_systems_1114.pdf_48904896.pdf.

  4. The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). Report IV. Contemporary issues in medicine: basic science and clinical research. Medical School Objectives Project 2001. Retreived from: https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Contemporary%20Issues%20in%20Med%20Basic%20Science%20Report%20IV.pdf.

  5. Australian Medical Council Limited. Standards for assessment and accreditation of primary medical programs by the Australian Medical Council. 2012. Retreived from: http://www.amc.org.au/joomla-files/images/Accreditation/FINAL-Standards-and-Graduate-Outcome-Statements-20-December-2012.pdf.

  6. Tamim H, Ferwana M, Al Banyan E, Al Alwan I, Hajeer A. Integration of evidence based medicine into a medical curriculum. Med Educ Online. 2009;14(15):1–5. doi:10.3885/meo.2009.F0000225.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE guide no. 96. Med Teach. 2015;37(4):312–22. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2014.970998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hsih KW, Iscoe MS, Lupton JR, Mains TE, Nayar SK, Orlando MS et al. The Student Curriculum Review Team: how we catalyze curricular changes through a student-centered approach. Med Teach. 2015;37(11):1008–12. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2014.990877.

  9. National Board of Medical Educators. Constructing written test questions for the basic and clinical sciences. NBME, Philadelphia, PA. 2015. http://www.nbme.org/publications/index.html. 2015.

  10. Seel N. Assimilation theory of learning. In: Seel N, editor. Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning. US: Springer; 2012. p. 324–6.

  11. Davis MH, Harden RM. Planning and implementing an undergraduate medical curriculum: the lessons learned. Med Teach. 2003;25(6):596–608. doi:10.1080/0142159032000144383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dent J, Harden RA. A practical guide for medical educators. 4th ed. London: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Harden RM, Davis MH, Crosby JR. The new Dundee medical curriculum: a whole that is greater than the sum of the parts. Med Educ. 1997;31(4):264–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mezirow J. Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.; 1991.

  15. Miller B, Dzwonek B, McGuffin A, Shapiro JI. From LCME probation to compliance: the Marshall University Joan C Edwards School of Medicine experience. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2014;5:377–82. doi:10.2147/amep.s70891.

    Google Scholar 

  16. MacCarrick G Quality assurance in medical education. 1 ed. London: Springer; 2013.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. University of Liverpool. How we monitor the quality of education and training: the quality improvement framework. 2015. http://www.gmc-uk.org/education/27080.asp. Accessed 6 Oct 2015.

  18. United States Medical Liscensing Examination. Step 2 CK content outline and specifications. 2015. http://www.usmle.org/step-2-ck/#contentoutlines. Accessed 2 Oct 2015.

  19. United States Medical Liscensing Examination. Step 1 content outline and specifications. 2015. http://www.usmle.org/step-1/#content-outlines. Accessed 2 Oct 2015.

  20. Langley GJ, Ronald M, Kevin MN, Thomas WN, Clifford LN, Lloyd PP. The improvement guide: a practical approach to enhancing organizational performance. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge Dr. Aaron McGuffin, MD, for his significant efforts in developing this model and the guidance he provided to the integration subcommittee during his tenure as Senior Associate Dean for Medical Education at JCESOM. We would like to acknowledge the support from Dr. Joseph Shapiro, our Dean, for his help with Fig. 4 and also his overall guidance and support for our efforts. We would also like to acknowledge the invaluable assistance provided by our graphic artist, Mathew Crutchfield, who helped us with Figs. 1 and 2.

Author information

Author notes

  1. C Gullo

    Present address: Office of Medical Education, Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, 1600 Medical Center Drive, Huntington, 25701, WV, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Marshall University, Huntington, WV, USA

    C Gullo, B Dzwonek & B Miller

Authors
  1. C Gullo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. B Dzwonek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C Gullo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gullo, C., Dzwonek, B. & Miller, B. A Disease-Based Approach to the Vertical and Horizontal Integration of a Medical Curriculum. Med.Sci.Educ. 26, 93–103 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-015-0208-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-015-0208-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation