4.6 Article

Long-term outcomes of the new pathway program at Harvard medical school: A randomized controlled trial

期刊

ACADEMIC MEDICINE
卷 75, 期 5, 页码 470-479

出版社

HANLEY & BELFUS INC
DOI: 10.1097/00001888-200005000-00018

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose. To evaluate the long-term effects of an innovative curriculum, the New Pathway (NP) Program, on behaviors and attitudes related to humanistic medicine, lifelong learning, and social learning. Method. Long-term follow-up of Harvard Medical School students who participated in a randomized controlled trial. Descriptive study using 1998 telephone interviews of 100 1989 and 1990 graduates (50 who had studied the NP curriculum, 50 who had studied the traditional curriculum). The NP Program consisted of problem-based learning tutorials, with coordinated lectures, labs, experiences in humanistic medicine, and clinical experiences; the traditional program consisted of basic science lectures and labs. Results. Of 22 measures on the survey NP and traditional students differed significantly on only five (three humanism; two social learning): 40% of NP students and 18% of traditional students went on to practice primary care or psychiatry. NP students rated their preparation to practice humanistic medicine higher than did traditional students and expressed more confidence in their ability to manage patients with psychosocial problems. NP students were more likely than were traditional students to believe that faculty from the first two years continued to influence their thinking. NP students liked the pedagogic approaches of their program more than traditional students did. There was no difference between the groups on measures of lifelong learning. Conclusions. Differences between NP and traditional students in the humanism domain first appeared during medical school and residency and remained significant well into practice, suggesting that humanistic medicine can be taught and learned.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据