Retrospective evaluation of undergraduate medical education by doctors at the end of their residency time in hospitals: consequences for the anatomical curriculum.

Reform of the undergraduate medical curriculum, including the debate on which of its parts or subjects are superfluous, is a topic of interest in many countries. On being examined at the end of their specialization period, doctors were asked to grade the relevance of all subjects in the undergraduate curriculum for training to become a medical doctor. The subjects that gained the highest grades were internal medicine, gross anatomy, physical examination course, physiology, and pharmacology. The five subjects graded least relevant were biomathematics, terminology, social medicine, medical physics, and medical chemistry. More than 80% of the doctors expressed interest in special lectures and courses, e.g., in topographic anatomy at the beginning of their postgraduate training. Retrospective evaluations at the end of residency time are helpful "evidence" to be considered in reforming the medical curriculum, and in particular in defining "core" and "optional" parts of the curriculum. The data show that anatomy is graded as highly relevant in the undergraduate medical curriculum by doctors at the end of their postgraduate training.