↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Integrated pathology and radiology learning for a musculoskeletal system module: an example of interdisciplinary integrated form

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Medical Education and Practice, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Integrated pathology and radiology learning for a musculoskeletal system module: an example of interdisciplinary integrated form
Published in
Advances in Medical Education and Practice, July 2018
DOI 10.2147/amep.s167692
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ihab Shafek Atta, Fahd Nasser AlQahtani

Abstract

Many curricula integrate radiology with anatomy courses but none of these curricula adopt integration of pathology with radiology as interdisciplinary form at the undergraduate level. The aim of the current study was to identify the outcome of interdisciplinary integrated course of pathology and radiology in musculoskeletal system module (MSK). A comparative interventional study was conducted on 60 students representing a whole class of the third year of level V. MSK and gastrointestinal module (GIT) were selected as study and control module, respectively, as being adopted for the same level/allocated hours, enriched with many subject areas for both fields, and availability of learning resources for both. A planned interdisciplinary integrated course for MSK pathology and radiology was implemented in the pathology lab. The subject area was selected and taught for both fields in consecutive ways by pathology and radiology experts. After teaching, gross/histopathologic specimens and radiology imaging/reports were distributed over benches and the students investigated the same. Conversely, in GIT control module, both fields were delivered separately, and no interdisciplinary form of integration occurred. Students' scores for both fields were filtered from the objective structured practical exam, quiz, and final exam. Students' marks and satisfaction were subjected to multiple comparisons using independent student's t-test. SPSS version 17 was used. Significances were obtained between total marks of students for both modules and between radiology courses for both with P=0.0152 and 0.0199, respectively. Number of students who achieved >80% in MSK was 20 and 26 compared to 15 and 17 in GIT for pathology and radiology, respectively. Student satisfaction was high for interdisciplinary integration in MSK with significant difference obtained between MSK and GIT. The integration of both fields augments student performance for both. This experience must encourage curriculum committee to globalize it over all other modules.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 3 23%
Student > Bachelor 2 15%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 46%
Social Sciences 2 15%
Engineering 1 8%
Unknown 4 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 July 2018.
All research outputs
#17,562,823
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,795
of 342,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them