Development of medical knowledge content for problem-solving competencies through dialogue with the undergraduate medical education community in Japan.

IF 3.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Medical Teacher Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1080/0142159X.2024.2385707
Osamu Nomura, Hiroyuki Komatsu, Yasushi Matsuyama, Takeshi Onoue, Masatomi Ikusaka, Hitoaki Okazaki, Yasuhiko Konishi
{"title":"Development of medical knowledge content for problem-solving competencies through dialogue with the undergraduate medical education community in Japan.","authors":"Osamu Nomura, Hiroyuki Komatsu, Yasushi Matsuyama, Takeshi Onoue, Masatomi Ikusaka, Hitoaki Okazaki, Yasuhiko Konishi","doi":"10.1080/0142159X.2024.2385707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Discrepancies existed between the medical knowledge sections of the Model Core Curriculum for Medical Education (MCC) and the Guidelines for the National Examination for Medical Practitioners (GNEMP) in Japan. These discrepancies have been one of the underlying factors hindering the development of learner-centered medical education in the country. The project team responsible for the 'Problem-Solving' section of the MCC aimed to address discrepancies between the disease lists in the MCC and the GNEMP.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We refined the disease list for the 2022 revision of the MCC using a three-phase process: (a) procedure development, (b) selection, and (c) adjudication. First, we developed a scoring system for sifting and prioritizing diseases in the GNEMP, selecting those that met our scoring criteria. An expert adjudication panel then finalized the list of diseases through discussion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 1,456 diseases identified in the GNEMP, 781 met the selection criteria. The adjudication panel selected 56 of these diseases to be newly added to the 2022 MCC, resulting in a total of 691 diseases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The list of diseases defined as required medical knowledge in the MCC was finalized through dialogue among medical education stakeholders, effectively minimizing discrepancies between the MCC and GNEMP.</p>","PeriodicalId":18643,"journal":{"name":"Medical Teacher","volume":"46 sup1","pages":"S61-S66"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Teacher","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2385707","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Discrepancies existed between the medical knowledge sections of the Model Core Curriculum for Medical Education (MCC) and the Guidelines for the National Examination for Medical Practitioners (GNEMP) in Japan. These discrepancies have been one of the underlying factors hindering the development of learner-centered medical education in the country. The project team responsible for the 'Problem-Solving' section of the MCC aimed to address discrepancies between the disease lists in the MCC and the GNEMP.

Method: We refined the disease list for the 2022 revision of the MCC using a three-phase process: (a) procedure development, (b) selection, and (c) adjudication. First, we developed a scoring system for sifting and prioritizing diseases in the GNEMP, selecting those that met our scoring criteria. An expert adjudication panel then finalized the list of diseases through discussion.

Results: Among the 1,456 diseases identified in the GNEMP, 781 met the selection criteria. The adjudication panel selected 56 of these diseases to be newly added to the 2022 MCC, resulting in a total of 691 diseases.

Conclusions: The list of diseases defined as required medical knowledge in the MCC was finalized through dialogue among medical education stakeholders, effectively minimizing discrepancies between the MCC and GNEMP.

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
通过与日本本科医学教育界对话,开发解决问题能力的医学知识内容。
背景:在日本,《医学教育示范核心课程》(MCC)的医学知识部分与《国家执业医师考试指南》(GNEMP)之间存在差异。这些差异是阻碍日本发展以学习者为中心的医学教育的根本因素之一。负责MCC "问题解决 "部分的项目小组旨在解决MCC与GNEMP中疾病列表之间的差异:方法:我们采用三阶段流程完善了 2022 年修订版 MCC 的疾病列表:(a) 程序开发,(b) 筛选,(c) 评审。首先,我们开发了一套评分系统,用于筛选 GNEMP 中的疾病并确定其优先次序,选出符合评分标准的疾病。然后,专家评审小组通过讨论最终确定了疾病清单:在 GNEMP 确定的 1,456 种疾病中,有 781 种符合选择标准。评审小组从这些疾病中挑选出 56 种新纳入 2022 年 MCC,最终确定的疾病总数为 691 种:结论:通过医学教育利益相关者之间的对话,最终确定了在 MCC 中定义为必备医学知识的疾病清单,有效地减少了 MCC 与 GNEMP 之间的差异。
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
Medical Teacher
Medical Teacher 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.50%
发文量
396
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Teacher provides accounts of new teaching methods, guidance on structuring courses and assessing achievement, and serves as a forum for communication between medical teachers and those involved in general education. In particular, the journal recognizes the problems teachers have in keeping up-to-date with the developments in educational methods that lead to more effective teaching and learning at a time when the content of the curriculum—from medical procedures to policy changes in health care provision—is also changing. The journal features reports of innovation and research in medical education, case studies, survey articles, practical guidelines, reviews of current literature and book reviews. All articles are peer reviewed.
期刊最新文献
Edgar Dale's Pyramid of Learning in medical education: Is it still a scientific myth after Ken Masters' research? To use or not to use: ERIC database for medical education research. "They already trusted us a lot": Allied health students' experiences of an innovative hospital, service-focussed placement model. Response to: 'When reality no longer meets the curriculum, what needs to adapt?' The importance of combined use of spacing and testing effects for complex skills training: A quasi-experimental 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