Topic Discussion Feedback

[Boston19]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I'm a PGY1, just over halfway through the year (!). During my recent quarter-eval with my residency director, I was given some specific feedback from the many topic discussions I've had over the past few months with preceptors. Specifically, I was told to "dig deeper" into the disease state, "read and really understand why", and to "be more thorough with the details".
I understand what my preceptors are talking about... I sometimes feel the discussions are just barely above the level of a student on APPEs. My preparation usually consists of reading the guidelines, a review article, and (sometimes) a primary literature piece. Then, I'll make a 1-2 page handout. After a few days of thinking about the feedback, I can't think of any specific ways to implement it, other than using less notes.

I was just seeing if there is any tips or tricks you guys have used to make topic discussions (and disease state learning in general) a better investment of time. Any and all recommendations would be appreciated - thanks!

 

[Praziquantel86]

I'm a PGY1, just over halfway through the year (!). During my recent quarter-eval with my residency director, I was given some specific feedback from the many topic discussions I've had over the past few months with preceptors. Specifically, I was told to "dig deeper" into the disease state, "read and really understand why", and to "be more thorough with the details".
I understand what my preceptors are talking about... I sometimes feel the discussions are just barely above the level of a student on APPEs. My preparation usually consists of reading the guidelines, a review article, and (sometimes) a primary literature piece. Then, I'll make a 1-2 page handout. After a few days of thinking about the feedback, I can't think of any specific ways to implement it, other than using less notes.

I was just seeing if there is any tips or tricks you guys have used to make topic discussions (and disease state learning in general) a better investment of time. Any and all recommendations would be appreciated - thanks!

The guidelines are a good starting point, as are review articles. I always found it helpful to read the primary articles referenced, particularly for the treatment sections. You'll quickly find that what the primary literature says does not always match the secondary literature. The primary references often include citations of other relevant primary sources, and so on.

The other thing to do is read about related topics, to gain a more general understanding of the physiology and treatments involved (reviews are generally sufficient for this). For example, if you're doing a discussion on decompensated cirrhosis, read about the disease states that make a patient cirrhotic, rather than just focusing on the acute management aspect. Over time, you'll find that these more general readings begin to overlap, and soon everything begins to make a little more sense.