Introduction of a new curriculum in women’s health in medical education: a framework for change

Abstract

Successful change requires effective strategies to address the potential opportunities and barriers that arise during the process. Introducing change in medical curriculum is not immune to many of these struggles. A recent change in a medical education curriculum directed at women’s health has prompted an examination of the factors active in such change. Education of Australian medical students in women’s health has traditionally been housed in the preclinical teaching of the endocrine and reproductive system and the clinical attachment of obstetrics and gynecology. Arguably, women’s health defined as a woman’s “emotional, social, cultural, spiritual, and physical well-being,” which “is determined by social, political, and economic factors as well as by women’s biology” has not been truly addressed in the above model. With the introduction of a new 4-year Graduate Entry Medical Program (GEMP), the opportunity arose to address the discrepancy in teaching women’s health. This article, using a framework for change, explores the contextual, stakeholder, timing, and resource factors inherent in this change in the medical curriculum in women’s health and discusses some solutions to potential barriers to such change.