Related Experiment Videos
Assessing evidence-based dermatology and evidence-based internal medicine curricula in US residency training
Robert P Dellavalle1, Deborah L Stegner, Ann M Deas
1Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Denver, CO, USA. robert.dellavalle@uchsc.edu
Objectives:
To examine attitudes toward evidence-based medicine and evidence-based dermatology and to assess evidence-based training in US internal medicine and dermatology residency programs.
Methods:
A 1-page self-administered questionnaire was mailed to residency training directors and chief residents at 104 dermatology and 103 internal medicine residency programs from the same or affiliated medical centers.
Results:
Questionnaires were returned by respondents from 70 (68%) of 103 internal medicine programs and 86 (83%) of 104 dermatology programs. Most respondents (91% internal medicine and 70% dermatology) strongly agreed or agreed that evidence-based internal medicine/dermatology is valuable and should be included in residency training (93% internal medicine and 70% dermatology). Respondents from internal medicine programs agreed more strongly with both statements than respondents from dermatology programs (P =.001). Dedicated evidence-based curricula were in place at significantly more internal medicine programs (50 [71%] of 70) than dermatology programs (20 [23%] of 86) (P<.001). Curricula at internal medicine programs offered significantly more evidence-based medicine training sessions (24 vs 6; P<.001) and biostatistics sessions (10 vs 2.3; P =.03), and internal medicine programs more frequently evaluated the curricula using clinical question applications (56% vs 30%; P =.04).
Conclusion:
Despite favorable attitudes toward evidence-based dermatology, compared with internal medicine programs, dedicated evidence-based training is underdeveloped in dermatology programs.