Background: Curricular time dedicated to ophthalmology is limited in undergraduate medical education. High-quality, early exposure to ophthalmology is necessary both as foundational training for all future physicians and to foster interest in the field. Purpose: Through a student-led review, the present study aimed to evaluate and revise the preclinical ophthalmology curriculum at a medical school in the Northeastern United States. Methods: Four senior medical students systematically evaluated the completeness and instructional effectiveness of preclinical ophthalmology curriculum materials for the 2024-2025 academic year. We evaluated alignment of content with the Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology (AUPO) standardized objectives and instructional design alignment with Mayer’s principles of multimedia learning. Student reviewers independently reviewed curriculum materials, followed by consensus meetings to develop a unified set of recommended changes. The director of medical student ophthalmology education conducted a final round of review. Revised curriculum was implemented September-October 2024. Results: All 12 major AUPO objectives were covered in the curriculum. However, 28% of the 116 subobjectives were absent from lecture slides, and 9.5% were missing from both lecture and seminar materials. Case-based teaching was used for 28% of distinct clinical diagnoses presented in lectures. Across 8 lectures comprising 561 total slides, we proposed 132 modifications, for an average of 16.5 changes per lecture. Recommendations focused on improving content coverage, increasing case-based examples, and encouraging participation to facilitate engagement and retention. Conclusion: The ophthalmology preclinical medical school curriculum used in this study did not fully address several AUPO learning objectives. This initiative represented a second round of curriculum evaluation by senior medical students, who are capable of fostering sustainable improvements in medical education to optimize ophthalmology training for future physicians.
Applebaum et al. (Fri,) studied this question.