Development of knowledge in basic sciences: a comparison of two medical curricula

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Curriculum Development
• Knowledge Assessment

Background:

• Medical education curricula vary significantly, particularly traditional medical curricula (TMC) versus integrated problem-based learning (PBL) curricula.
• Existing literature indicates no definitive performance differences between students educated under these distinct philosophies.
• Charité Medical University of Berlin employs both TMC and a reformed medical curriculum (RMC), utilizing the Progress Test in Medicine (PTM) for comprehensive knowledge evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the longitudinal development and retention of basic medical science knowledge.
• To evaluate knowledge acquisition in students enrolled in traditional versus problem-based learning medical curricula.

Main Methods:

• Relative frequencies of correct answers in the PTM were calculated for basic sciences and the entire curriculum for each student.
• Data were averaged, grouped by semester and curriculum, and analyzed using ANOVAs with Bonferroni correction (p < 0.005).
• Effect size was quantified using eta-squared (η(2)).

Main Results:

• RMC students initially showed a slight advantage in basic sciences during the first three semesters.
• TMC students demonstrated a knowledge peak in basic sciences and subsequently outperformed RMC students, including in the final semester.
• Despite fluctuations, both curricula exhibited consistent overall knowledge development, with no significant long-term performance disparity.

Conclusions:

• Progress testing provides valuable longitudinal insights into knowledge development during undergraduate medical education.
• The high-stakes Physikum examination in the traditional curriculum may significantly influence student learning and performance.
• The primary distinction between TMC and PBL appears linked to the impact of major examinations rather than inherent curriculum design differences.