#MCGConf2021CP Malshi Karunitalake, a medical student, has done most of the work & provided valuable insights. Marcel D’Eon conceived of the study and did the early set up. Harold Bull has helped with study design, recruitment, and data analysis. @AUG_EII
Considering the criteria used by judges to rate medical school content, which ones are “better”? #MCGConf2021CP@AUG_EII
We found a wide variation in interpretation of the four criteria we presented. We need to do more to train our judges in how we want them to rate the content. #MCGConf2021CP@AUG_EII
#MCGConf2021CP Bridges are complicated. Travel is dangerous. Some designs work better than others. @AUG_EII
Just like implementation.
Gene Hall gave us a great overview of the change process, and how hard change is to manage successfully. #MCGConf2021CP@AUG_EII
Oops! Some bridges look great but are not sturdy enough. Others look simple but are rock solid. #MCGConf2021CP@AUG_EII
#MCGConf2021CP Key question in the title: describe methods/approaches, suggest common categories, and then classify elements of those methods. Provide recommendations for research and development to enhance and strengthen the scholarship in this field. @AUG_EII
#MCGConf2021CP Anchored in outcomes, competencies, and content framework of curriculum. Broad consensus for this in med ed. (Barrow et al (2010); Prideaux (2007)).
We thought we were going to do a systematic review. The initial exploration surprised us. There was nothing systematic about content rating. We had undertaken a scoping review. Another review in this field had been conducted prior. #MCGConf2021CP@AUG_EII