PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 7309398

Learning about rehabilitation.

Abstract

Not many teaching hospitals or practices in Britain can offer a single service specialty of rehabilitation as a forum for undergraduate learning, and it is therefore necessary either to create a simulated programme or to draw together a range of services or specialties solely for teaching purposes. In this paper, a short medical undergraduate course at Aberdeen University Medical School, using the second approach, is described. The focus of the course was on the doctor's role, in every patient and specialty, in the active prevention of temporary or permanent dependence and the ultimate aim was to create in medical students a more positive attitude to holistic patient management. A problem-solving framework was used, in which the students were asked to draw up a provisional problem list for patients from nearly all specialties seen in the post-acute phase in Aberdeen hospitals and in the recovering or adapted state at home. In was hoped that in the process of compiling the data-base students would gain some knowledge of the functional consequences of illness and of the profession and services which might be able to help. Students then met clinical staff to discuss their problem lists and the doctor's role in preventing or treating functional problems. Subjective assessments of the course by students and staff suggest that, although the students had difficulty at first in seeing the doctor's role in relation to functional problems, by the end of the course most had acquired, through discussion of particular patients, awareness of the importance of that role in assessment and patient education. On the basis of this attempt, the course will be continued but with some modifications.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E M Russell, G S Chessell. 1981. Learning about rehabilitation.. https://doi.org/10.3109/03790798109166745

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Conditional reliability of admissions interview ratings: extreme ratings are the most informative.

CONTEXT: Admissions interviews are unreliable and have poor predictive validity, yet are the sole measures of non-cognitive skills used by most medical school admissions departments. The low reliability may be due in part to variation in conditional reliability across the rating scale. OBJECTIVES: To describe an empirically derived estimate of conditional reliability and use it to improve the predictive validity of interview ratings. METHODS: A set of medical school interview ratings was compared to a Monte Carlo simulated set to estimate conditional reliability controlling for range restriction, response scale bias and other artefacts. This estimate was used as a weighting function to improve the predictive validity of a second set of interview ratings for predicting non-cognitive measures (USMLE Step II residuals from Step I scores). RESULTS: Compared with the simulated set, both observed sets showed more reliability at low and high rating levels than at moderate levels. Raw interview scores did not predict USMLE Step II scores after controlling for Step I performance (additional r2 = 0.001, not significant). Weighting interview ratings by estimated conditional reliability improved predictive validity (additional r2 = 0.121, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Conditional reliability is important for understanding the psychometric properties of subjective rating scales. Weighting these measures during the admissions process would improve admissions decisions.

Education, Medical, Undergraduate↗