Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

B Jolly

Publications and source records attributed to B Jolly.

35 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1999

A comparison of the educational opportunities on junior medical attachments in general practice and in a teaching hospital: a questionnaire survey.

OBJECTIVES: To obtain students' perceptions of the educational quality of the general internal medicine teaching overall and to determine whether specific learning objectives were better addressed in general practice or in hospital. DESIGN: The survey was carried out after a 10 week block of general internal medicine, consisting of five weeks taught in general practice and five weeks taught in a teaching hospital. Students were randomly allocated to start in either general practice or hospital. The outcome measure was a questionnaire survey of students perceptions' of their learning on the two halves of the block. Each student completed the same questionnaire twice: once after their hospital experience and once after their general practice experience. Statistical Analysis was carried out using the SPSS package for Windows 3.1. Group means were calculated for each response, and the mean differences for each student's responses for the two learning environments were analysed using t-tests for paired samples. SETTING: Royal Free and University College Medical School at University College London. SUBJECTS: The study population was the entire annual intake (n = 225) of students into the first clinical year at one UK medical school. RESULTS: Students perceived they learnt more about history taking and physical examination in the community, whereas they learnt more about writing up their clerkings, keeping progress notes and disease management in hospital. CONCLUSIONS: The community and hospital environments appear to have different strengths for the teaching of medical students. These data support judicious transfer of clinical skills teaching from teaching hospitals into general practice, when the circumstances achieved here can be duplicated. However, some aspects of the clinical attachment, particularly record keeping and disease management, are probably better taught in hospital at present.

Clinical Medicine↗
PubMed1999

Evidence-based education: development of an instrument to critically appraise reports of educational interventions.

OBJECTIVES: Educational interventions may ultimately impact on patient care as well as affecting individuals' learning. Critical evaluation of educational literature by those involved in designing and developing educational interventions is therefore important. A checklist instrument for critically appraising reports of educational interventions is described. DESIGN: The instrument was developed by an iterative process and piloted. The instrument consists of nine questions: 1. Is there a clear question which the study seeks to answer? 2. Is there a clear learning need which the intervention seeks to address? 3. Is there a clear description of the educational context for the intervention? 4. Is the precise nature of the intervention clear? 5. Is the study design able to answer the question posed by the study? 6. Are the methods within the design capable of appropriately measuring the phenomena which the intervention ought to produce? 7. Are the outcomes chosen to evaluate the intervention appropriate? 8. Are there any other explanations of the results explored in the study? 9. Are any unanticipated outcomes explained? A worked example is given to illustrate how the instrument can be used in practice. SETTING: The Department of General Practice in Glasgow. SUBJECTS: Young general practitioners and the Educational Journal Club. RESULTS: The instrument was feasible. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the checklist allows the reader to critically appraise reports of educational interventions and helps in the practice of evidence-based education.

Educational Measurement↗
PubMed1997

Can students learn clinical method in general practice? A randomised crossover trial based on objective structured clinical examinations.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether students acquired clinical skills as well in general practice as in hospital and whether there was any difference in the acquisition of specific skills in the two environments. DESIGN: Randomised crossover trial. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Annual intake of first year clinical students at one medical school. INTERVENTION: A 10 week block of general internal medicine, one half taught in general practice, the other in hospital. Students started at random in one location and crossed over after five weeks. OUTCOME MEASURES: Students' performance in two equivalent nine station objective structured clinical examinations administered at the mid and end points of the block: a direct comparison of the two groups' performance at five weeks; analysis of covariance, using their first examination scores as a covariate, to determine students' relative improvement over the second five weeks of their attachment. RESULTS: 225 students rotated through the block; all took at least one examination and 208 (92%) took both. For the first half of the year there was no significant difference in the students' acquisition of clinical skills in the two environments; later, however, students taught in general practice improved slightly more than those taught in hospital (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Students can learn clinical skills as well in general practice as in hospital; more work is needed to clarify where specific skills, knowledge, and attitudes are best learnt to allow rational planning of the undergraduate curriculum.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1991

Independent learning: an exploration of student grand rounds.

Grand rounds (GRs) for students were started with the 1987 cohort of first-year clinical students at two University of Toronto teaching hospitals. A qualitative exploratory evaluation, using questionnaires, interviews and observation, of a sample of 78 staff and student participants showed that the aim of the GRs to activate student skills in independent study was achieved but that interaction between students and other clinical and laboratory specialists as a basis for round presentation was less than intended. Students spent an average of 10 hours on independent work. Round presentations were of a high standard. Students' main concerns were the amount of freedom and feedback given. The goals of the programme as perceived by students influenced both the work done and the style of presentation. These outcomes were contrasted with a UK qualitative study of student presentations on ward rounds, and the importance of an appropriate context for independent work highlighted.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗