Development of consensus-based aims, contents, intended learning outcomes, teaching, and evaluation methods for a history of medicine and pharmacy course for medical and pharmacy students in the Arab world: a Delphi study

Abstract

Background History courses are “required” elements among the didactic elements of the medical and pharmacy curricula in many schools around the world. The aim of this study was to develop consensus-based aims, contents, intended learning outcomes, teaching, and evaluation methods of a history of medicine and pharmacy course for medical and pharmacy students in the Arab World. Methods A systematic search of PubMed, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted to identify course aims, contents, intended learning outcomes from the literature. The search was supplemented by semi-structured in-depth interviews with 5 educators/academicians, 3 pharmacists, and 3 physicians. The Delphi technique was used among panelists (10 educators/academicians, 4 physicians, and 4 pharmacists) to develop consensus-based course aims, contents, intended learning outcomes, teaching, and evaluation methods. Results The vast majority of the panelists agreed on the 10 items (agreement ≥88.9%) on the importance of teaching history to medical and pharmacy students. Consensus-based aims (n = 4) and intended learning outcomes (n = 13) were developed in the 1st and 2nd iterative Delphi rounds. The panelists suggested that 16 dedicated meeting hours (1 credit hour) would be required to cover the course. Bloom’s verbs were used to target the lower and higher orders of the cognitive domain. The course could be taught through face-to-face lectures, provision of reading materials, video documentaries, case studies, group discussions and debates. Multiple-choice questions, written reflections, portfolios, group projects, and engagement in discussions and debates might be used to evaluate performance of students. Conclusion Consensus-based course of history of medicine and pharmacy course was developed for medical and pharmacy students in the Arab World. Well-designed course aims, contents, intended learning outcomes, teaching, and evaluation methods are more likely to meet the accreditation requirements and might improve performance of medical and pharmacy students. Future studies are still needed to investigate if such consensus-based courses can improve performance of the students.

Blended learning in nursing pharmacology: elevating cognitive skills, engagement and academic outcomes

“…In the cardiovascular renal drug division, students encounter the same complex problem-solving exercises integral to the LBL course structure. Addressed in small groups, these exercises were designed to promote in-depth discussions, propelling students toward the analysis, evaluation, and creation of the stages of Bloom’s taxonomy ( Shawahna, 2021 ).…”

Using a mixed method to develop consensus-based aims, contents, intended learning outcomes, teaching, and evaluation methods for a course on epilepsy for postgraduate or continuing education in community health nursing programs

“…Currently, gold-standard in designing courses for undergraduate nursing students do not exist. In the absence of gold standards, engaging experts who are rich in information like educators, neurologists, practicing nurses, and patients with epilepsy could provide suitable alternatives in designing courses/curricula on epilepsy for postgraduate or continuing education in community health nursing programs [ 33 , 37 ]. Taking into consideration the views and opinions of the students to achieve formal consensus on topics/contents of the course could be appealing to the learners as it has been argued that students are more likely to engage in a course they agree with its contents than a course they did not participate in its design and selection of its contents.…”

“…Currently, there is no consensus on a suitable panel size in formal consensus methods. Previous studies have used panels in the sizes of less than 70 panelists [ 33 , 37 , 45 , 46 ]. The panelists who participated in this study were diversified in terms of their sociodemographic and practice variables.…”

“…A purposive sampling technique was followed to invite and recruit panelists to the nominal group and Delphi technique rounds. The sampling technique used in this study was informed by previous studies that use the two techniques [ 33 , 37 ]. The panelists were identified and contacted through key contacts in the field.…”

“…The panelists were identified and contacted through key contacts in the field. As currently there is no consensus on an ideal panel size, the panel size in this study was informed by previous studies [ 33 , 37 ]. Having prior knowledge of the subject being investigated was a prerequisite for being selected into the panel.…”