Optimizing allocation of curricular content across the undergraduate & graduate medical education continuum

BACKGROUND: Medical educators struggle to incorporate socio-cultural topics into crowded curricula. The continuum of learning includes undergraduate and graduate medical education. Utilizing an exemplar socio-cultural topic, we studied the feasibility of achieving expert consensus among two groups of faculty (experts in medical education and experts in social determinants of health) on which aspects of the topic could be taught during undergraduate versus graduate medical education. METHODS: A modified Delphi method was used to generate expert consensus on which learning objectives of social determinants of health are best taught at each stage of medical education. Delphi respondents included experts in medical education or social determinants of health. A survey was created using nationally published criteria for social determinants of health learning objectives. Respondents were asked 1) which learning objectives were necessary for every physician (irrespective of specialty) to develop competence upon completion of medical training and 2) when the learning objective should be taught. Respondents were also asked an open-ended question on how they made the determination of when in the medical education continuum the learning objective should be taught. RESULTS: 26 out of 55 experts (13 social determinants of health and 13 education experts) responded to all 3 Delphi rounds. Experts evaluated a total of 49 learning objectives and were able to achieve consensus for at least one of the two research questions for 45 of 49 (92%) learning objectives. 50% more learning objectives reached consensus for inclusion in undergraduate (n = 21) versus graduate medical education (n = 14). CONCLUSIONS: A modified Delphi technique demonstrated that experts could identify key learning objectives of social determinants of health needed by all physicians and allocate content along the undergraduate and graduate medical education continuum. This approach could serve as a model for similar socio-cultural content. Future work should employ a qualitative approach to capture principles utilized by experts when making these decisions

Defining curricular priorities for student-as-teacher programs: A National Delphi Study

<p><b>Background:</b> “Student-as-Teacher” (SaT) programs have been growing in number to prepare medical students for their teaching roles in residency and beyond, but it remains unknown what content areas should be covered in SaT curricula.</p> <p><b>Aim:</b> To determine five to ten “essential” content areas for inclusion in SaT curricula using expert opinion.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> Using a three-round Delphi process, moderators iteratively surveyed a panel of 28 medical educators (25 academy directors and three individuals identified as having expertise in undergraduate medical education) representing 25 medical schools in the United States. This “SaT Delphi Working Group” was tasked with rating topics for inclusion in SaT curricula on a 3-point scale (i.e. 1. “essential,” 2. “important, but not essential” 3. “not important”). Topics achieving ≥70% consensus as “essential,” “important” or “not important” were accepted by the moderators and removed from subsequent rounds.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> Hundred per cent response rate (<i>n</i> = 28) was achieved for all survey rounds. Five content areas reached consensus as “essential” for inclusion in a SaT curriculum: feedback, bedside teaching and clinical precepting, small-group teaching, case-based teaching and professionalism as a medical educator.</p> <p><b>Conclusion:</b> This consensus from a group of leaders in medical education is a first step toward the implementation of more developmentally-appropriate SaT competencies.</p