Evaluation of a Biomedical Informatics course for medical students: a Pre-posttest study at UNAM Faculty of Medicine in Mexico

BMC Medical Education

Adrián Martínez-González¹  Tania Vives-Varela²  Fabián Fernández-Saldívar²  Marlette Lobato-Valverde²  Adrián I Martínez-Franco²  Melchor Sánchez-Mendiola¹ 

[1] UNAM Faculty of Medicine, Secretariat of Medical Education, Ave. Universidad 3000 C.U., México 04510, D.F., Mexico;Department of Biomedical Informatics, UNAM Faculty of Medicine, Ave. Universidad 3000, C.U., México 04510, D.F., Mexico

关键词: Assessment;    Undergraduate medical education;    Program evaluation;    Biomedical informatics education;   

Others  :  1206371
DOI  :  10.1186/s12909-015-0349-7

 received in 2014-09-23, accepted in 2015-03-19,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Biomedical Informatics (BMI) education in medical schools is developing a sound curricular base, but there are few published reports of their educational usefulness. The goal of this paper is to assess knowledge change and satisfaction in medical students after a BMI curriculum.

Methods

The National Autonomous University of México Faculty of Medicine (UNAM) recently implemented a curricular reform that includes two BMI sequential courses (BMI-1 and BMI-2). The research design was one-group pretest-posttest. An objective test with evidence of validity was used for knowledge measurement. A satisfaction questionnaire was applied at the end of the courses. Two-tailed paired Student’s t-tests were applied, comparing knowledge scores in the pre and post-test for each course.

Results

The study included student cohorts during two consecutive academic years. The 2013 BMI-1 course (n = 986 students) knowledge pretest score was 43.0 ± 8.6 (mean percent correct ± SD), and the post-test score was 57.7 ± 10.3 (p < 0.001); the 2014 BMI-1 (n = 907) pretest score was 43.7 ± 8.5, and the post-test was 58.1 ± 10.5 (p < 0.001). The 2012 BMI-2 course (n = 683) pretest score was 26.3 ± 7.9, the post-test score was 44.3 ± 13.3 (p < 0.001); the 2013 BMI-2 (n = 926) pretest score was 27.5 ± 7.5, and the post-test was 42.0 ± 11.0 (p < 0.001). The overall opinion of the students regarding the course was from good to excellent, with a response rate higher than 90%. The satisfaction questionnaires had high reliability (Cronbach’s alpha of 0.93).

Conclusions

The study shows a significant increase in BMI knowledge after an educational intervention in four medical student cohorts, and an overall positive evaluation by the students. Long-term follow-up is needed, as well as controlled studies of BMI educational interventions using performance endpoints.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Sánchez-Mendiola et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Shortliffe EH, Cimino JJ: Biomedical Informatics. Computer Applications in Health Care and Biomedicine. 4th ed. London, UK: Springer-Verlag; 2014.
• [2]Anderson B. Contemporary issues in medicine–medical informatics and population health: report II of the Medical School Objectives Project. Acad Med. 1999; 74(2):130-41.
• [3]Greiner A, Knebel E. Health professions education. A bridge to quality. institute of medicine. Greiner A, Knebel E, editors. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C; 2003.
• [4]Stead WW, Searle JR, Fessler HE, Smith JW, Shortliffe EH. Biomedical informatics: changing what physicians need to know and how they learn. Acad Med. 2011; 86(4):429-34.
• [5]Shortliffe E. Biomedical informatics in the education of physicians. JAMA. 2010; 304(11):1227-8.
• [6]Ohno-Machado L. Careers in informatics: a diversity of options with an abundance of jobs. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001; 19(6):919.
• [7]Detmer DE, Lumpkin JR, Williamson JJ. Defining the medical subspecialty of clinical informatics. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009; 16(2):167-8.
• [8]Detmer DE, Shortliffe EH. Clinical informatics: prospects for a new medical subspecialty. JAMA. 2014; 311(20):2067-8.
• [9]Sánchez-Mendiola M, Martínez-Franco AI, Rosales-Vega A et al.. Development and implementation of a biomedical informatics course for medical students: challenges of a large-scale blended-learning program. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013; 20(2):381-7.
• [10]Otto A, Kushniruk A. Incorporation of medical informatics and information technology as core components of undergraduate medical education - time for change! Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009; 143:62-7.
• [11]Krause ND, Roulette GD, Papp KK, Kaelber D: Assessing medical informatics confidence among 1st and 2nd year medical students. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2006, 989.
• [12]McGowan JJ, Passiment M, Hoffman HM. Educating medical students as competent users of health information technologies: the MSOP data. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2007; 129(Pt 2):1414-8.
• [13]Silverman H, Cohen T, Fridsma D. The evolution of a novel biomedical informatics curriculum for medical students. Acad Med. 2011; 87(1):84-90.
• [14]Sánchez-Mendiola M, Durante-Montiel I, Morales-López S, Lozano-Sánchez R, Martinez-González A, Graue-Wiechers E. Plan de estudios 2010 de la facultad de medicina de la Universidad nacional autónoma de México. Gac Med Mex. 2011; 147(2):152-8.
• [15]Harris AD, McGregor JC, Perencevich EN et al.. The use and interpretation of quasi-experimental studies in medical informatics. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006; 13(1):16-23.
• [16]Fraenkel J, Wallen N, Hyun H. How to design and evaluate research in education. 8th ed. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY; 2012.
• [17]Mantas J, Ammenwerth E, Demiris G et al.. Recommendations of the international medical informatics association (IMIA) on education in biomedical and health informatics. Methods Inf Med. 2010; 49(2):105-20.
• [18]Espino JU, Levine MG: An overview of the medical informatics curriculum in medical schools. Proc AMIA Symp 1998, 467–71.
• [19]Sánchez M, Martínez I. Informática biomédica. ath ed. Mexico, Springer, UNAM; 2014.
• [20]Downing SM. Twelve steps for effective test development. In: Handbook of test development. Downing SMHT, editor. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J.; 2006: p.3-25.
• [21]Haladyna TM, Downing SM, Rodriguez MC. A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Appl Meas Educ. 2002; 15(3):309-33.
• [22]Sullivan G, Feinn R. Using effect size-or why the P value is not enough. J Grad Med Educ. 2012; 4(3):279-82.
• [23]Kampov-Polevoi J, Hemminger BM. A curricula-based comparison of biomedical and health informatics programs in the USA. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011; 18(2):195-202.
• [24]Koong KS, Ngafeeson MN, Liu LC. Meaningful use and meaningful curricula: a survey of health informatics programmes in the USA. Int J Electron Healthc. 2012; 7(1):1-18.
• [25]Carlile S, Sefton J. Healthcare and the information age: implications for medical education. Med J Aust. 1998; 168(7):340-3.
• [26]Dattakumar A, Gray K, Henderson K-B, Maeder A, Chenery H. We are not educating the future clinical health professional workforce adequately for e-health competence: findings of an Australian study. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012; 178:33-8.
• [27]Hu D, Sun Z, Li H. An overview of medical informatics education in China. Int J Med Inform. 2013; 82(5):448-66.
• [28]Hussein R, Khalifa A. Biomedical and health informatics education and research at the Information Technology Institute in Egypt. Yearb Med Inform. 2011; 6(1):161-8.
• [29]Parry D, Hunter I, Honey M et al.. Building an educated health informatics workforce–the New Zealand experience. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013; 188:86-90.
• [30]Röhrig R, Stausberg J, Dugas M. Development of national competency-based learning objectives “Medical Informatics” for undergraduate medical education. Methods Inf Med. 2013; 52(3):184-8.
• [31]Winter A, Hilgers R-D, Hofestädt R, Knaup-Gregori P, Ose C, Trimmer A. More than four decades of medical informatics education for medical students in Germany. Methods Inf Med. 2013; 52(3):181-3.
• [32]Zarubina TV, Nikolaidi EN, Shtevnina JI. Teaching the “Medical Informatics” course in higher professional medical education of the Russian Federation. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013; 190:74-6.
• [33]Zvárová J, Svačina S, Rauch J, Haase J, Grunfeldová H. research and education in biomedical and healthcare informatics. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012; 174:53-6.
• [34]Davis DA, Mazmanian PE, Fordis M, Van Harrison R, Thorpe KE, Perrier L. Accuracy of physician self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006; 296(9):1094-102.
• [35]Eva KW, Regehr G. Self-assessment in the health professions: a reformulation and research agenda. Acad Med. 2005; 80(10 Suppl):S46-54.
• [36]Badgett RG, Paukert JL, Levy LS: Teaching clinical informatics to third-year medical students: negative results from two controlled trials. BMC Med Educ. 2001, 1:3. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/1/3
• [37]Larsen DP, Butler AC, Roediger HL. Test-enhanced learning in medical education. Med Educ. 2008; 42(10):959-66.
• [38]Cook D, Bordage G, Schmidt HG. Description, justification and clarification: a framework for classifying the purposes of research in medical education. Med Educ. 2008; 42(2):128-33.
• [39]Cook D. If you teach them, they will learn: why medical education needs comparative effectiveness research. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2012; 17(3):305-10.
• [40]Rouse DN. Employing Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework to determine the effectiveness of health information management courses and programs. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2011; 8:1-5.
• [41]Beckman TJ, Cook D. Developing scholarly projects in education: a primer for medical teachers. Med Teach. 2007; 29(2–3):210-8.
• [42]Yardley S, Dornan T. Kirkpatrick’s levels and education “evidence”. Med Educ. 2012; 46(1):97-106.
• [43]Ram P, van der Vleuten C, Rethans J-J, Schouten B, Hobma S, Grol R. Assessment in general practice: the predictive value of written-knowledge tests and a multiple-station examination for actual medical performance in daily practice. Med Educ. 1999; 33(3):197-203.
• [44]Otero P, Hersh W. Education in Biomedical and Health Informatics in the Web 3.0 Era: Standards for data, curricula, and activities. Yearb Med Inform. 2011; 6(1):139-41.
• [45]Greenes RA, Shortliffe EH. Informatics in biomedicine and health care. Acad Med. 2009; 84(7):818-20.
• [46]Association of American medical colleges and the Howard Hughes medical institute. Report of Scientific Foundations for Future Physicians Committee, Washington, D.C; 2009.