Cited by 14Innovations in Medical EducationHealth and Medical EducationProblem and Project Based Learning

A clinical approach to population medicine

Ivory, Kimberley, Bandler, Lilon, Hawke, Catherine, Armstrong, Bruce·2013·The Clinical Teacher

Abstract

BACKGROUND: An epidemic of chronic disease in an ageing population obliges us to train medical students to participate in patient and population-centred health systems as members of connected teams with the skills to work in an increasingly pluralistic cultural environment. CONTEXT: Like many others, the graduate-entry Sydney Medical Program struggles with teaching population medicine to students who often perceive it to be less relevant than clinical studies. Evaluation found that although students were aware of the importance of population medicine to clinical practice, they felt the existing programme lacked integration with their clinical education and did not develop professional skills. INNOVATION: Experience told us that clinicians apply the principles of population medicine in every consultation, understanding that individual health outcomes are moderated by the social determinants of health. We applied this knowledge to develop an integrated, community-engaged population medicine curriculum for our students in their final two clinical years. Each student will follow a patient with a chronic health condition in the community over 14 months. They will consider their patient's experience with chronic disease and its management through a population medicine lens. Students share their learning in tutorial sessions and through online assessment tasks. IMPLICATION: A comprehensive evaluation of patient, faculty and student experiences of the programme will allow us to assess whether we have achieved our goal of revealing to students how the application of the principles of population medicine is essential to excellence in daily clinical practice. Early data suggest that students feel positive and excited about this curriculum innovation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1743-498x.2012.00618.x

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ivory, K., Bandler, L., Hawke, C., & Armstrong, B.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Ivory, Kimberley
Venue
The Clinical Teacher
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-03-11
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
94-98
ISSN
  • 1743-4971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-498X
OpenAlex
W2052706176
Cited by
14
References
10
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Clinical Teacher (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
Keywords
population medicine, medical curriculum, chronic disease, social determinants of health, clinical teaching, student perceptions, curriculum integration, patient-centered care
MeSH terms
Aging, Chronic Disease, Community Medicine, Curriculum, Education, Medical, Graduate, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Learning, Primary Prevention, Public Health, Risk Factors, Sociology, Medical, Students, Medical, Cultural Competency, Evidence-Based Practice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review