Comparing achievements of medical graduates in an alternative unique pre-medical track vs regular medical track.

IF 1.6 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES International Journal of Medical Education Pub Date : 2022-09-02 DOI:10.5116/ijme.62f6.10b6
Shimon Amar, Elena Chernin, Gabriel Schreiber, Michael Friger, Angel Porgador
{"title":"Comparing achievements of medical graduates in an alternative unique pre-medical track vs regular medical track.","authors":"Shimon Amar,&nbsp;Elena Chernin,&nbsp;Gabriel Schreiber,&nbsp;Michael Friger,&nbsp;Angel Porgador","doi":"10.5116/ijme.62f6.10b6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the association between the achievements of medical students and whether they were admitted via the pre-medical track or the regular direct track.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a comparative retrospective data study using data from a three-year experimental cohort in a six-year medical school. We analyzed the academic achievements of all students admitted at one Israeli medical school between 2013-2015, either directly to the six-year program or via a pre-medical track. We compared averages of both yearly final grades and final medical examinations grades between the two groups. Descriptive statistics were calculated and differences between groups were evaluated using multivariate analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 324 students included in the study, 65 (20.1%) were enrolled in all three cohorts of the pre-medical track. Age and Gender distribution were nearly similar for both tracks. For the first two cohorts, the average final grades of year one of pre-medical students were significantly higher than those of regular direct track (F=<sub>(3,167)</sub> 6.10, p=0.001), but the opposite was true for the third cohort (F=<sub>(3,110)</sub>2.38, p=0.073). No further statistically significant differences were found neither between the groups in their final exams grades nor between choosing a MD/PhD optional track and admission pathway.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results suggest promising achievements with the pre-medical admission pathway. This should encourage further discussion about the significant potential human resources lost by current admission processes and may question the effectiveness of six-year programs in medical schools.</p>","PeriodicalId":14029,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9904996/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.62f6.10b6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the association between the achievements of medical students and whether they were admitted via the pre-medical track or the regular direct track.

Methods: We performed a comparative retrospective data study using data from a three-year experimental cohort in a six-year medical school. We analyzed the academic achievements of all students admitted at one Israeli medical school between 2013-2015, either directly to the six-year program or via a pre-medical track. We compared averages of both yearly final grades and final medical examinations grades between the two groups. Descriptive statistics were calculated and differences between groups were evaluated using multivariate analysis.

Results: Of the 324 students included in the study, 65 (20.1%) were enrolled in all three cohorts of the pre-medical track. Age and Gender distribution were nearly similar for both tracks. For the first two cohorts, the average final grades of year one of pre-medical students were significantly higher than those of regular direct track (F=(3,167) 6.10, p=0.001), but the opposite was true for the third cohort (F=(3,110)2.38, p=0.073). No further statistically significant differences were found neither between the groups in their final exams grades nor between choosing a MD/PhD optional track and admission pathway.

Conclusions: Our results suggest promising achievements with the pre-medical admission pathway. This should encourage further discussion about the significant potential human resources lost by current admission processes and may question the effectiveness of six-year programs in medical schools.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较另类独特的医学预科课程与常规医学课程的医学毕业生的成就。
目的:评价医学生的学业成绩与是否通过医学预科或常规直接入学的关系。方法:我们使用一所六年制医学院三年实验队列的数据进行了一项比较回顾性数据研究。我们分析了2013-2015年间被一所以色列医学院录取的所有学生的学术成就,这些学生要么直接进入6年制课程,要么通过医学预科课程进入。我们比较了两组的年度期末成绩和期末体检成绩的平均值。计算描述性统计数据,并采用多变量分析评估组间差异。结果:在纳入研究的324名学生中,65名(20.1%)参加了医学预科课程的所有三个队列。年龄和性别分布在两个轨道上几乎相似。在前两个队列中,医学预科学生第一年的平均期末成绩显著高于常规直接跟踪的学生(F=(3167) 6.10, p=0.001),而在第三个队列中则相反(F=(3110)2.38, p=0.073)。两组学生在期末考试成绩上,以及在选择医学博士/博士选修课程和录取途径上,都没有发现进一步的统计学显著差异。结论:我们的研究结果表明,医学前入学途径取得了可喜的成果。这应该鼓励进一步讨论当前录取程序所损失的大量潜在人力资源,并可能质疑医学院6年课程的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Medical Education
International Journal of Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
3.20%
发文量
38
期刊最新文献
How do mentors perceive and perform their role in a reflection-based mentoring programme for medical students? Enhancing the learning experience by empowering medical students to co-create learning tools and classroom activities. Profiles of intercultural sensitivity of healthcare students: a person-centred approach. Effectively supporting widening participation learners in medical education through a capability approach lens. Exploring a metacognitive approach for case analysis based learning of anxiety adjustment in nurses: a qualitative study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1