BACKGROUND: Prior reviews of geriatrics curricula for internal medicine (IM) and family medicine (FM) residents have not evaluated study quality or assessed learning objectives or specific IM or FM competencies. OBJECTIVE: This review of geriatrics curricula for IM and FM residents seeks to answer 3 questions: (1) What types of learning outcomes were measured? (2) How were learning outcomes measured? and (3) What was the quality of the studies? METHODS: We evaluated geriatrics curricula that reported learning objectives or competencies, teaching methods, and learning outcomes, and those that used a comparative design. We searched PubMed and 4 other data sets from 2003-2015, and assessed learning outcomes, outcome measures, and the quality of studies using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) and Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) methods. RESULTS: Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria. Most curricula were intended for IM residents in the inpatient setting; only 1 was solely dedicated to FM residents. Median duration was 1 month, and minimum geriatrics competencies covered were 4. Learning outcomes ranged from Kirkpatrick levels 1 to 3. Studies that reported effect size showed a considerable impact on attitudes and knowledge, mainly via pretests and posttests. The mean MERSQI score was 10.5 (range, 8.5-13) on a scale of 5 (lowest quality) to 18 (highest quality). CONCLUSIONS: Few geriatrics curricula for IM and FM residents that included learning outcome assessments were published recently. Overall, changes in attitudes and knowledge were sizeable, but reporting was limited to low to moderate Kirkpatrick levels. Study quality was moderate.
BACKGROUND: Prior reviews of geriatrics curricula for internal medicine (IM) and family medicine (FM) residents have not evaluated study quality or assessed learning objectives or specific IM or FM competencies. OBJECTIVE: This review of geriatrics curricula for IM and FM residents seeks to answer 3 questions: (1) What types of learning outcomes were measured? (2) How were learning outcomes measured? and (3) What was the quality of the studies? METHODS: We evaluated geriatrics curricula that reported learning objectives or competencies, teaching methods, and learning outcomes, and those that used a comparative design. We searched PubMed and 4 other data sets from 2003-2015, and assessed learning outcomes, outcome measures, and the quality of studies using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) and Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) methods. RESULTS: Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria. Most curricula were intended for IM residents in the inpatient setting; only 1 was solely dedicated to FM residents. Median duration was 1 month, and minimum geriatrics competencies covered were 4. Learning outcomes ranged from Kirkpatrick levels 1 to 3. Studies that reported effect size showed a considerable impact on attitudes and knowledge, mainly via pretests and posttests. The mean MERSQI score was 10.5 (range, 8.5-13) on a scale of 5 (lowest quality) to 18 (highest quality). CONCLUSIONS: Few geriatrics curricula for IM and FM residents that included learning outcome assessments were published recently. Overall, changes in attitudes and knowledge were sizeable, but reporting was limited to low to moderate Kirkpatrick levels. Study quality was moderate.
Authors: Glenda R Westmoreland; Steven R Counsell; Wanzhu Tu; Jingwei Wu; Debra K Litzelman Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Jill Elizabeth Thistlethwaite; David Davies; Samilia Ekeocha; Jane M Kidd; Colin MacDougall; Paul Matthews; Judith Purkis; Diane Clay Journal: Med Teach Date: 2012 Impact factor: 3.650
Authors: Andrea Wershof Schwartz; Chelsea E Hawley; Jessica V Strong; Sarah C Phillips; Omar Amir; Brian M Ludwin; Elizabeth T Ngoc Phung; Jennifer Moye Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-06-18 Impact factor: 7.538