Improvement of Radiological Teaching – Effects of Focusing of Learning Targets and Increased Consideration of Learning Theory Knowledge

Abstract

ABSTR AC TPurpose Based on evaluation and examination results of students, a necessity for improvement of so far purely instructorbased radiological teaching at the local institution was determined. Aim of our study was to use one out of eight seminars to exemplify adaptation of the teaching concept according to learning theory knowledge, to determine the resulting effects and to interpret them. Materials and methodsThe institutional review board approved the prospective study of the seminar conversion, which was performed after the end of the winter semester 2015/2016. Didactically, this included a course split into online preparation, attendance phase and online follow-up with integration of interactive scaffolding, practice-oriented clinical teaching according to Stanford, Peyton skills transfer and extensive feedback into the attendance phase. At the beginning and at the end of each course, each student filled in identical, standardized questionnaires (n = 256 before and after conversion) using a 5-point Likert scale (1: very good; to 5: deficient) and additionally answered two randomly chosen written examination questions from a content-adapted questionnaire pool of the last five years. For statistical evaluation, the Mann-Whitney U-Test was used for evaluation data and Fisher's Exact test for exam questions.Results Before/after conversion, the subjective total evaluation score of students was 3.22 (mean value) ± 1.51 (standard deviation) / 1.66 ± 0.78 (p < 0.001) and the objective proportion of correctly answered examination questions in the respective cohort at the beginning of the seminar 37.7/ 53.9 % and at the end of the seminar 55.1/84.6 % (p < 0.001). ConclusionThe conversion of the test seminar resulted in both a better evaluation of the teaching unit by the students (evaluation) and a considerably higher rate of correctly answered examination questions from past state examinations (learning success). This supports transferring the concept to comparable teaching units. Ergebnisse Vor/nach Umstellung betrug die subjektive studentische Gesamtbewertung 3,22 (Mittelwert) ± 1,51 (Standardabweichung) / 1,66 ± 0,78 (p < 0,001) und der objektive Anteil korrekt beantworteter Prüfungsfragen in der jeweiligen Kohorte zu Beginn des Seminars 37,7/53,9 % sowie am Ende des Seminars 55,1/84,6 % (p jeweils < 0,001).

The effectiveness of the Peyton’s 4-step teaching approach on skill acquisition of procedures in health professions education: A systematic review and meta-analysis with integrated meta-regression

“…In this phase of the selection process 405 records were excluded. The full-texts of the remaining 37 records were assessed for eligibility and 23 records were excluded with the following reasons: 12 records reported an intervention, which was not eligible for inclusion ( Bode et al, 2012 ; Bube, Konge & Hansen, 2017 ; Craven et al, 2018 ; Custers et al, 1999 ; Handley & Handley, 1998 ; Hill et al, 2010 ; Holmes et al, 1998 ; Krautter et al, 2015 ; Liu & Hunt, 2017 ; Velmahos et al, 2004 ; Wirth et al, 2018 ; Yoganathan et al, 2018 ); 8 records used a study design, which was not eligible for inclusion ( Easton, Stratford-Martin & Atherton, 2012 ; Mishra & Dornan, 2003 ; Nikendei et al, 2014 ; Schroder et al, 2017 ; Skrzypek et al, 2018 ; Smith et al, 2019 ; Sopka et al, 2012 ; Tommaso, 2016 ); 2 records were excluded because of missing data ( Archer, Van Hoving & De Villiers, 2015 ; Seymour-Walsh et al, 2015 ) and 1 record did not use the specified primary outcome assessment for procedural skills ( Greif et al, 2010 ). Finally, 14 studies were included into this systematic review.…”

Exploiting Multidisciplinary Conferences in Radiology: Teaching and Learning Opportunities for Medical Students, Radiologists and Clinicians

“…Students should be supported in contributing to case reports and modifications in radiology so as to understand elaborating extracted information from imaging. We want to emphasise that diagnostic and therapeutic decisions made by clinicians depend on timely and efficient case demonstrations of radiologists as part of MC teams (Slanetz & Mullins, 2016;Wirth et al, 2018;Petsch et al, 2020b). High workload, tight schedules and staff shortage in clinical routine can affect interaction among medical students, radiologists and clinicians at MCs (Petsch et al, 2020a).…”

“…Radiology departments should exploit MCs for teaching (Hammick et al, 2009), giving medical students the real-life opportunity to gain medical knowledge. Articles on academic radiology from 2000 to 2020 cover various concepts on minimising teacher-centred approaches which lead to passive learning (Harden & Laidlaw, 2013;Wirth et al, 2018;Minghong et al, 2019), or fostering interactive teaching (Collins, 2007;Rahim & Ros, 2016;Wirth et al, 2018). Proposals on organising clerkships (Kasch et al, 2016), practical electives (Francavilla et al, 2016), and early implementing of radiology in medical studies aim at increasing the interest in diagnostic and interventional radiology as a medical discipline (Retrouvey et al, 2018;Kreiser et al, 2019).…”

Teaching Radiology Courses: How to Address Learning Needs of Medical Students Through Interacting in Radiology

“…With this approach LN can be addressed through dialogue, while being time-effective for clinical teaching and learning in radiology (Petsch et al, 2020a). If medical students state they are missing basic insight into radiology in particular (Visscher et al, 2015), or sufficient interaction with radiologists (Wirth et al, 2018), this feedback should be reflected (Berman, 2015) by looking at what they must learn for clinical and interventional radiology. An interactive teaching approach is useful when content has not entirely been decided on (Arnold, 2018), or when teaching material is subject to revision.…”