A survey of radiology clerkships at teaching hospitals in the united states

Dan M. Barlev, Guenter M. Lautin, E. Stephen Amis, Marilyn E. Lerner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES. The nature and extent of medical school radiology clerkships were quantified.METHODS Questionnaires were sent to 126 medical school radiology departments in the United States. Queries were made regarding length and requirements for clerkships, methods of teaching, methods of student evaluation, and responsibility for these functions. RESULTS. Fifty-seven responses (45%) were received. Methods of student teaching varied, but most departments relied on readout sessions, watching procedures, “show-and-tell” sessions, didactic slide and film presentations, and various other methods. Emphasis of most student clerkships was placed on teaching imaging disease processes rather than on how to read x-rays. A written examination was most commonly used to evaluate student performance. Most teaching was done by fulltime faculty, with lesser contributions from part-time faculty, fellows, and residents. METHODS. Emphasis of most student clerkships was placed on teaching imaging disease processes rather than on how to read x-rays. A written examination was most commonly used to evaluate student performance. Most teaching was done by full-time faculty, with lesser contributions from part-time faculty, fellows, and residents. CONCLUSIONS. The nature and extent of medical school radiology clerkships in departments responding to the survey varied, but most conformed, at least in part, to standards based on survey results and the published literature.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)105-108
Number of pages4
JournalInvestigative Radiology
Volume29
Issue number1
StatePublished - 1994

Fingerprint

Radiology
Teaching Hospitals
Teaching
Students
Medical Schools
X-Rays
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • Education
  • Medical student education
  • Radiology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Barlev, D. M., Lautin, G. M., Amis, E. S., & Lerner, M. E. (1994). A survey of radiology clerkships at teaching hospitals in the united states. Investigative Radiology, 29(1), 105-108.

A survey of radiology clerkships at teaching hospitals in the united states. / Barlev, Dan M.; Lautin, Guenter M.; Amis, E. Stephen; Lerner, Marilyn E.

In: Investigative Radiology, Vol. 29, No. 1, 1994, p. 105-108.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Barlev, DM, Lautin, GM, Amis, ES & Lerner, ME 1994, 'A survey of radiology clerkships at teaching hospitals in the united states', Investigative Radiology, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 105-108.
Barlev, Dan M. ; Lautin, Guenter M. ; Amis, E. Stephen ; Lerner, Marilyn E. / A survey of radiology clerkships at teaching hospitals in the united states. In: Investigative Radiology. 1994 ; Vol. 29, No. 1. pp. 105-108.
@article{2ee24b59357f4fe3be71365c3ca4c63f,
title = "A survey of radiology clerkships at teaching hospitals in the united states",
abstract = "RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES. The nature and extent of medical school radiology clerkships were quantified.METHODS Questionnaires were sent to 126 medical school radiology departments in the United States. Queries were made regarding length and requirements for clerkships, methods of teaching, methods of student evaluation, and responsibility for these functions. RESULTS. Fifty-seven responses (45{\%}) were received. Methods of student teaching varied, but most departments relied on readout sessions, watching procedures, “show-and-tell” sessions, didactic slide and film presentations, and various other methods. Emphasis of most student clerkships was placed on teaching imaging disease processes rather than on how to read x-rays. A written examination was most commonly used to evaluate student performance. Most teaching was done by fulltime faculty, with lesser contributions from part-time faculty, fellows, and residents. METHODS. Emphasis of most student clerkships was placed on teaching imaging disease processes rather than on how to read x-rays. A written examination was most commonly used to evaluate student performance. Most teaching was done by full-time faculty, with lesser contributions from part-time faculty, fellows, and residents. CONCLUSIONS. The nature and extent of medical school radiology clerkships in departments responding to the survey varied, but most conformed, at least in part, to standards based on survey results and the published literature.",
keywords = "Education, Medical student education, Radiology",
author = "Barlev, {Dan M.} and Lautin, {Guenter M.} and Amis, {E. Stephen} and Lerner, {Marilyn E.}",
year = "1994",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "105--108",
journal = "Investigative Radiology",
issn = "0020-9996",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A survey of radiology clerkships at teaching hospitals in the united states

AU - Barlev, Dan M.

AU - Lautin, Guenter M.

AU - Amis, E. Stephen

AU - Lerner, Marilyn E.

PY - 1994

Y1 - 1994

N2 - RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES. The nature and extent of medical school radiology clerkships were quantified.METHODS Questionnaires were sent to 126 medical school radiology departments in the United States. Queries were made regarding length and requirements for clerkships, methods of teaching, methods of student evaluation, and responsibility for these functions. RESULTS. Fifty-seven responses (45%) were received. Methods of student teaching varied, but most departments relied on readout sessions, watching procedures, “show-and-tell” sessions, didactic slide and film presentations, and various other methods. Emphasis of most student clerkships was placed on teaching imaging disease processes rather than on how to read x-rays. A written examination was most commonly used to evaluate student performance. Most teaching was done by fulltime faculty, with lesser contributions from part-time faculty, fellows, and residents. METHODS. Emphasis of most student clerkships was placed on teaching imaging disease processes rather than on how to read x-rays. A written examination was most commonly used to evaluate student performance. Most teaching was done by full-time faculty, with lesser contributions from part-time faculty, fellows, and residents. CONCLUSIONS. The nature and extent of medical school radiology clerkships in departments responding to the survey varied, but most conformed, at least in part, to standards based on survey results and the published literature.

AB - RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES. The nature and extent of medical school radiology clerkships were quantified.METHODS Questionnaires were sent to 126 medical school radiology departments in the United States. Queries were made regarding length and requirements for clerkships, methods of teaching, methods of student evaluation, and responsibility for these functions. RESULTS. Fifty-seven responses (45%) were received. Methods of student teaching varied, but most departments relied on readout sessions, watching procedures, “show-and-tell” sessions, didactic slide and film presentations, and various other methods. Emphasis of most student clerkships was placed on teaching imaging disease processes rather than on how to read x-rays. A written examination was most commonly used to evaluate student performance. Most teaching was done by fulltime faculty, with lesser contributions from part-time faculty, fellows, and residents. METHODS. Emphasis of most student clerkships was placed on teaching imaging disease processes rather than on how to read x-rays. A written examination was most commonly used to evaluate student performance. Most teaching was done by full-time faculty, with lesser contributions from part-time faculty, fellows, and residents. CONCLUSIONS. The nature and extent of medical school radiology clerkships in departments responding to the survey varied, but most conformed, at least in part, to standards based on survey results and the published literature.

KW - Education

KW - Medical student education

KW - Radiology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028334992&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028334992&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8144329

AN - SCOPUS:0028334992

VL - 29

SP - 105

EP - 108

JO - Investigative Radiology

JF - Investigative Radiology

SN - 0020-9996

IS - 1

ER -