Impact of student choice on academic performance:cross-sectional and longitudinal observations of a student cohort

BACKGROUND: Student choice plays a prominent role in the undergraduate curriculum in many contemporary medical schools. A key unanswered question relates to its impact on academic performance. METHODS: We studied 301 students who were in years 2 and 3 of their medical studies in 2005/06. We investigated the relationship between SSC grade and allocated preference. Separately, we examined the impact of ‘self-proposing’ (students designing and completing their own SSC) on academic performance in other, standard-set, summative assessments throughout the curriculum. The chi-squared test was used to compare academic performance in SSC according to allocated preference. Generalised estimating equations were used to investigate the effect of self-proposing on performance in standard-set examinations. RESULTS: (1) Performance in staff-designed SSC was not related to allocated preference. (2) Performance in year 1 main examination was one of the key predictors of performance in written and OSCE examinations in years 2, 3 and 4 (p<0.001). (3) The higher the score in the year 1 examination, the more likely a student was to self-propose in subsequent years (OR [CI] 1.07 [1.03-1.11], p<0.001). (4) Academic performance of students who self-proposed at least once in years 2 and/or 3 varied according to gender and year of course. CONCLUSION: In this study, no association was observed between allocated preference and SSC grade. The effect of self-proposing on academic performance in standard-set examinations was small. Our findings suggest instead that academically brighter students are more likely to design their own modules. Although student choice may have educational benefits, this report does not provide convincing evidence that it improves academic performance

Poor glycated haemoglobin control and adverse pregnancy outcomes in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: Systematic review of observational studies

BACKGROUND: Glycaemic control in women with diabetes is critical to satisfactory pregnancy outcome. A systematic review of two randomised trials concluded that there was no clear evidence of benefit from very tight versus tight glycaemic control for pregnant women with diabetes. METHODS: A systematic review of observational studies addressing miscarriage, congenital malformations and perinatal mortality among pregnant women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes was carried out. Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Observational studies with data on glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) levels categorised into poor and optimal control (as defined by the study investigators) were selected. Relative risks and odds ratios were calculated for HbA(1c )and pregnancy outcomes. Adjusted relative risk estimates per 1-percent decrease in HbA(1c )were calculated for studies which contained information on mean and standard deviations of HbA(1c). RESULTS: The review identified thirteen studies which compared poor versus optimal glycaemic control in relation to maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes. Twelve of these studies reported the outcome of congenital malformations and showed an increased risk with poor glycaemic control, pooled odds ratio 3.44 (95%CI, 2.30 to 5.15). For four of the twelve studies, it was also possible to calculate a relative risk reduction of congenital malformation for each 1-percent decrease in HbA(1c), these varied from 0.39 to 0.59. The risk of miscarriage was reported in four studies and was associated with poor glycaemic control, pooled odds ratio 3.23 (95%CI, 1.64 to 6.36). Increased perinatal mortality was also associated with poor glycaemic control, pooled odds ratio 3.03 (95%CI, 1.87 to 4.92) from four studies. CONCLUSION: This analysis quantifies the increase in adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with diabetes who have poor glycaemic control. Relating percentage risk reduction in HbA(1c )to relative risk of adverse pregnancy events may be useful in motivating women to achieve optimal control prior to conception