Citations

Professionalism is a core competency of gross anatomy and general medical school curricula requiring students to develop the skills of giving and receiving peer feedback. Our study evaluated the effectiveness of delivering feedback in a group setting compared to delivering it individually. The first year class of Mayo medical students (n=50) enrolled in gross anatomy (in dissection teams of 3 or 4) completed weekly anonymous peer‐evaluations of their team regarding multiple aspects of professionalism (integrity, responsibility, compassion, and peer respect). Professionalism scores were calculated using the quantitative values from these surveys. Students were also asked to comment on strengths and areas for improvement for each student. At the mid‐point of the course, peer comments and professionalism scores were shared with students in debriefing sessions, either individually or as a team. Preliminary analysis of pre‐ and post‐intervention professionalism scores indicates that students receiving feedback in a group setting are more likely to demonstrate higher scores on subsequent evaluations. Our findings suggest that providing feedback to first‐year medical students in a group setting is more beneficial for group dynamics and may improve professional attitudes and behaviors. This work was supported by the Mayo Clinic Department of Anatomy. Grant Funding Source None

Gross anatomy courses often utilize teaching assistants (TAs) to serve a multifaceted purpose. Qualitative analysis of interviews with gross anatomy TAs reveals seven distinct roles: formal teaching during course lectures, informal teaching during dissection, prosecting a demonstration cadaver, orchestrating regular review sessions, coordinating formative feedback about academic progress and professionalism, tutoring struggling students outside of class time, and supporting students in crisis should the need arise. Analysis also finds that TAs did not anticipate the full scope of their duties prior to undertaking them, and felt particularly unprepared to address issues of student mental health. We report our findings and propose a model for proactively training TAs for their inherently complex role. This work was supported by the Mayo Clinic Department of Anatomy. Grant Funding Source Student/Postdoctoral Travel Award Student Award

Early medical education courses provide opportunities for promoting leadership in future physicians. Our research sought to integrate explicit activities of teamwork and leadership into the first‐year gross anatomy course and assess student leaders through self reflection and team evaluation. Fifty first‐year medical students were assigned to three‐ or four‐member dissection teams with group leaders designated on a rotating basis. Teamwork was emphasized through daily group quizzes, oral patient presentations relating clinical diagnoses to anatomy, and extensive embryology presentations. Group leaders were responsible for leading the dissections after attending daily orientation sessions on the teaching cadaver. Team and self evaluations of group leaders were gathered with weekly electronic surveys. Preliminary results suggest that team leaders rate themselves lower than their teammates do with respect to altruism, accountability and responsibility. One explanation for this discrepancy is decreased self‐awareness of student leaders regarding their own performance. Further research may demonstrate whether increased communication between leaders and team members can improve leaders' awareness of their capabilities. Research support came from the Mayo Clinic Department of Anatomy. Grant Funding Source N/A

Recent curricular redesign at Mayo Medical School integrated radiology into first‐year gross and developmental anatomy. The resulting six‐week (120 contact hours) Human Structure block teaches gross anatomy through dissection, radiologic imaging, and correlation with embryology. To further promote holistic physician‐development, refinement of the Human Structure course has been driven by the six core competencies of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME): patient care, medical knowledge, practice‐based learning, interpersonal skills, professionalism, and systems‐based practice. We report here more than 20 educational interventions built into the Human Structure block that may serve as a model for incorporating the ACGME core competencies into early medical education. The block emphasizes clinically oriented anatomy, invites self‐ and peer‐evaluation, provides daily formative feedback through an audience response system, and employs team‐based learning. The course curriculum includes didactic briefing sessions and roles for students as teachers, leaders, and collaborators. Third‐year medical students serve as teaching assistants, enhancing their own knowledge of anatomy, bettering their skills as medical educators, and facilitating group communication and critiques. This work was supported by the Mayo Clinic Department of Anatomy. Grant Funding Source None

The goal of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the audience response system (ARS) as a tool for providing formative feedback to first year medical students. Over a three year period, we collected data from anatomy and histology courses in which students answered clinically oriented multiple choice questions using the ARS. We compared each student's cumulative ARS and final exam scores and we calculated a correlation coefficient between these two values. In addition, we conducted a questionnaire to evaluate the students' perception on ARS. According to our results, students saw ARS as useful for providing feedback on performance with a mean of 3.61 (1‐5 scale). There was a strong positive correlation between ARS and final exam scores. R values for the ARS and NBME Anatomy subject exam was R=.9556; and for the Anatomy/Radiology written exams, R=.9882. Students believed that ARS improved their performance with a mean of 3.94 (1‐5 scale). Students also preferred more frequent ARS quizzes with fewer questions to less frequent sessions with more questions (mean=3.74). In conclusion, students use ARS as a feedback tool and can rely on it as a good predictor of final course performance. We have found that ARS feedback motivates students to seek help from faculty when appropriate. It is user friendly, interacts well with PowerPoint, and is not time consuming for faculty. Grant Funding Source AAA