Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of academic hospitalists on third-year medical students during inpatient medicine rotations. METHOD: The authors conducted a retrospective quantitative assessment of medical student evaluations of hospitalist and nonhospitalist Department of Medicine faculty at Oregon Health & Science University, for the 1998-00 academic years. Using a nine-point Likert-type scale, students evaluated the faculty on the following characteristics: communication of rotation goals, establishing a favorable learning climate, use of educational time, teaching style, evaluation and feedback, contributions to the student's growth and development, and overall effectiveness as a clinical teacher. RESULTS: A total of 138 students rotated on the university wards during the study period; 100 with hospitalists, and 38 with nonhospitalists. Of these students, 99 (71.7%) returned evaluations. The hospitalists received higher numeric evaluations for all individual attending characteristics. Significance was achieved comparing communication of goals (p =.011), effectiveness as a clinical teacher (p =.016), and for the combined analysis of all parameters (p <.001). Despite lack of achieving statistical significance, there was a trend toward hospitalists being more likely to contribute to the medical student's perception of growth and development during the period evaluated (p =.065). CONCLUSIONS: In addition to performing the responsibilities required of full-time hospital-based physicians, hospitalists were able to provide at least as positive an educational experience as did highly rated nonhospitalist teaching faculty and in some areas performed better. A hospitalist model can be an effective method of delivering inpatient education to medical students.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hunter et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: