2019
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-019-02434-7
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Curricular Advancement of Biomedical Engineering Undergraduate Design Projects Beyond 1 Year: A Pilot Study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Today, a new paradigm for health education is on the rise. Through core curricular courses such as design teams courses [ 1 ], biomedical engineering (BME) undergraduates are asked to resolve issues prompted by medical professionals [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. In the case of engineering capstone courses, a substantial number of the projects developed by students are from the medical area [ 4 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Today, a new paradigm for health education is on the rise. Through core curricular courses such as design teams courses [ 1 ], biomedical engineering (BME) undergraduates are asked to resolve issues prompted by medical professionals [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. In the case of engineering capstone courses, a substantial number of the projects developed by students are from the medical area [ 4 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Background: The movement towards project-based learning courses has brought new challenges as education transitions from lecture-based delivery to project-specific mentoring. Three commonly addressed domains in BME capstone design courses are IP, regulation, and market access [1,2,3]. While guest lectures from industry experts are often used to discuss these domains at-scale, these lectures are often too generalized or not-timed with the project need.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 Market Access office hours were not added until Y2. 2 In Y2, teams were not required to opt-in or submit a brief for regulatory office hours, and instead showed up to an open working session with the expert and course faculty. This resulted in increased utilization, but the number of teams that interacted solely with the expert was not tracked.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%