3.9 Article

Long-term evaluation of undergraduate family medicine curriculum in Slovenia

Journal

SRPSKI ARHIV ZA CELOKUPNO LEKARSTVO
Volume 136, Issue 5-6, Pages 274-279

Publisher

SRPSKO LEKARSKO DRUSTVO
DOI: 10.2298/SARH0806274S

Keywords

undergraduate family medicine curriculum; programme evaluation; ten-year period; Slovenia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction In 1994, as a result of curriculum reform, the Ljubljana medical school established its first department of family medicine and introduced its first curriculum of family medicine. The new subject was well accepted by the students and the medical school. Nevertheless, there was no comprehensive analysis of the curriculum during this period. Objective Our aims were to assess the quality of teaching based on fulfilled expectations, pre-defined learning objectives and satisfaction in a 10-year period, and to measure changes in career preference towards family medicine. Method An analysis of two sets of questionnaires, routinely given to medical students in academic years 1997/1998 and 2006/2007, was made. Results Most of the students' expectations were met, and the level increased over ten years. The level of achievement of learning objectives has been high and increased over the ten-year period. Family medicine still receives high scores in students' satisfaction. Although there is evidence that the family medicine curriculum is well accepted and that it improves some of the attitudes towards family medicine, it does not influence the career choice of students. Conclusion The level of achievement of learning objectives increased with the experiences of the teachers. We improved the attitude of medical students toward general practice and general practitioners. We have not been successful in influencing career choice of students, which is an objective that is probably outside our reach.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available