- Joined
- May 11, 2012
- Messages
- 61
- Reaction score
- 1
medical school : one change
One word: parking
As far as the above post goes, most of the best lecturers at our school were phds.
The best teachers I have had are the ones directly involved with medical education. The course coordinators and multiple lecture teachers. For the most part they understand what is relevant to the education of medical students and what is not.
Second to both. My parking pass cost more than a month's rent.One word: parking
As far as the above post goes, most of the best lecturers at our school were phds.
As far as the above post goes, most of the best lecturers at our school were phds.
Eliminate anything that ends with "-based learning"
I wish my school taught more to the boards and less to the in-house exams. As interesting as medical history lessons are, I try to live my life as HY as possible (jk, sorta) so just jump to the selling points that are gonna help me on Step.
Make it easy to transfer to another school.
Figure out a way to reduce costs so I don't end up with almost 250k debt
Zero mandatory attendance to anything.
Eliminate anything that ends with "-based learning"
No more reflection essays.
Eliminate anything that ends with "-based learning"
Yes, eliminate the touchy feely BS.
Also, pick it up and put it in a different location.
And, make it cheaper....
Even patient skills/doctoring/preceptorship stuff?
I wasn't talking about evidence-based medicine, I was talking about the team-based learning and group-based learning and problem-based learning and case-based learning that is all a waste of time.EBM is obnoxiously important. There are dozens of outdated therapies that looked good on paper (i.e. via basic sciences) that end up hurting/killing people in the long run.
While I am a big proponent of basic science application, the basic sciences are still full of holes and EBM is the best shaped plug for that hole the we have at the moment.
Eliminate anything that ends with "-based learning"
I wasn't talking about evidence-based medicine, I was talking about the team-based learning and group-based learning and problem-based learning and case-based learning that is all a waste of time.
That said, the standards for basic science work are infinitely higher than in the clinical world. Using EBM to patch up holes in the system is like using gasoline to put out a fire.
I understand what you meant... but disagree with the last statement. There are dozens of treatments which are counter intuitive to what basic science might tell us and EBM has shown them effective.
EBM is chaos. No one really knows how to accurately study human populations. There is incredible amount of noise despite our best studies. Even for things like MI or Heart failure, med school would have you believe there is a consensus and EBM to back it up and this could not be further from the truth. Let's not even get to the funding sources of much of EBM research being the same people who will profit off the results
basic sciences help you think and try to help you rationalize whether something called "EBM" makes sense. if EBM shows somethingn different, then we must think either our basic science is incorrect, or the EBM is...I usually put my bets on the EBM because there is too much variation often to make a lot of sense in these studies.
You must not have read my posts.... I a for basic sciences first and Ebm second. I wish our basic science understanding was complete.... but it is not so Ebm is the best patch we have until researchers fill those gaps. The alternative is we just hang a population of people out to dry (die?). You can acknowledge the problems or shortcomings of something and still understand how it is the best we have or at least the "least worse". I think a few of you have lost sight of that
I reread your posts, my apologies. It's just many have totally excluded basic science thought and reasoning for "we were taught this is EBM, don't know why, but just is" and end up using that on treating patients...i think EBM is good to study things we don't know much about yet, and incorporate it and make sense of it in the context of basic science however little or much it may be
I unfortunately see too many people taking population research and essentially treat every individual patent the same,, instead of taking the basic science, clinical signs of the patient him/herself and EBM and trying to individualize a particular treatment.
I think you would agree with the above. Unfortunately EBM and basic sciences are flawed, but I think if both are integrated into an approach that makes sense to us as learners, then perhaps we can develop a theory as to why something happens and therefore treat the patent more appropriately.