Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11376378

Problem-based learning. Challenges, barriers and outcome issues.

S A Azer
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Although many recent studies have discussed specific issues related to problem-based learning in medical education, a comprehensive review of the literature on the consequences of its use and the outcomes of curriculum based on problem-based learning have not been accurately looked at. Furthermore, there is no available review that critically evaluates challenges and barriers to the implementation of problem-based learning curriculum in medical schools. The purpose of this part is to highlight the major challenges and barriers reported during curriculum preparation and implementation and to critically evaluate the consequences of problem-based learning introduction and its educational outcomes.

Explore related subjects

Attitude of Health PersonnelCurriculumEducation, Medical, UndergraduateEducational StatusFaculty, MedicalHumansNeeds AssessmentOrganizational InnovationProblem-Based LearningProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationStudents, MedicalJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S A Azer. 2001. Problem-based learning. Challenges, barriers and outcome issues.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11376378/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2002

Practices and attitudes of Japanese oncologists and palliative care physicians concerning terminal sedation: a nationwide survey.

PURPOSE: To clarify the frequency of practice of sedation therapy for terminally ill cancer patients and to identify physicians' attitudes toward sedation. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to 1,436 Japanese oncologists and palliative care physicians with a request to report their practice of and attitudes toward palliative sedation therapy. RESULTS: A total of 697 physicians returned questionnaires (response rate, 49.6%). Use of mild, intermittent-deep, or continuous-deep sedation for physical and psychologic distress was reported by 89% and 64%, 70% and 46%, and 66% and 38%, respectively. In vignettes in which physicians were asked whether they would use sedation for a patient with refractory dyspnea or with existential distress, 14% and 15%, respectively, chose continuous-deep sedation as a strong possibility. Those physicians less confident with psychologic care and with higher levels of professional burnout were more likely to choose continuous-deep sedation. In vignettes in which they were asked whether they use sedation for a patient with depression or delirium, 39% and 31%, respectively, considered psychiatric treatment to be a strong possibility, and 42% and 50% regarded continuous-deep sedation as a potential treatment option. Physicians less involved in caring for the terminally ill and less specialized in palliative medicine were significantly less likely to choose psychiatric treatment. CONCLUSION: Sedation is frequently used for severe physical and psychologic distress of cancer patients. Physicians' clinical experiences with the terminally ill and their levels of professional burnout influence the decisions. Training and education for physicians in regard to end-of-life care and valid clinical guidelines for palliative sedation therapy are necessary.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗