Abstract
Objective: The goal of this study was to compare educational outcomes of medical students who participated in a longitudinal pilot curriculum to those who participated in the existing, traditional curriculum during their third-year of medical school. Method: The authors reviewed clinical evaluations and examination performances of 15 students enrolled in a pilot curriculum to 60 students who participated in the traditional curriculum. The nove Lead.Serve.Inspire. (LSI) curriculum consisted of a longitudinal integrated hybrid of internal medicine, neurology, and psychiatry rotations and didactic instruction spanning nearly four months. Results: The National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) subject examination class averages of students enrolled in the combined internal medicine, neurology, and psychiatry pilot program were not significantly different compared to students completing these examinations and enrolled in the traditional block rotations during the same time period. On clinical performance measures in psychiatry, students performed above average on clinical measures of medical knowledge, communication skills, and diagnostic assessment and critical analysis skills. Conclusion: Preliminary data from the pilot program is promising, suggesting that the Lead.Serve.Inspire. (LSI) curriculum may offer an equitable alternative to the traditional discipline-specific block rotations.
Highlights
Medical schools are constantly working to improve the quality and process of the educational experience for students, often incurring considerable investment by faculty, students and other stakeholders
Preliminary data from the pilot program is promising, suggesting that the Lead.Serve.Inspire. (LSI) curriculum may offer an equitable alternative to the traditional discipline-specific block rotations
The LSI curriculum for third-year medical students was retooled and positioned to occur as part of a combined experience involving the disciplines of psychiatry, neurology, and internal medicine
Summary
Medical schools are constantly working to improve the quality and process of the educational experience for students, often incurring considerable investment by faculty, students and other stakeholders. Models of clinical rotations for third-year medical students have been explored in great depth. Existing research has compared outcomes of students involved in these different models, including longitudinal integrated, hybrid, and block clerkships. Key differences in student experiences and outcomes between discipline-specific block rotations and the continuity of longitudinal, integrated, and hybrid clerkships support the benefits of continuity in clinical learning. Teherani, et al identified that students enrolled in longitudinal integrated clerkships rated patientcentered experiences; faculty teaching, feedback, and observation; as well as the clerkship itself higher relative to students that participated in hybrid or block clerkships. Student performance on the United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 2 (clinical knowledge) was equivalent across models [1]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
