Setting educational priorities for learning the concepts of population health

Abstract

Following the World Health Organization's policy of 'Health for All by the Year 2000', doctors are increasingly being seen as health care providers to populations of patients, in addition to their more traditional role as doctors to individuals in a one-to-one encounter. In order for doctors to take on this expanded role, they must learn the knowledge and skills appropriate to population health. In this paper, we propose a method of educational priority-setting which allows educational planners to identify those diseases and adverse health conditions most appropriate for studying the concepts of population health. Using the Measurement Iterative Loop of Tugwell and colleagues as a framework, a table of Priority Illness Conditions was developed and compared with a previous priority list developed from a survey of clinical teachers at the McMaster University Medical School. Discussion of the implications for this approach in setting educational priorities at undergraduate, postgraduate and continuing medical education levels is presented, along with a review of possible shortcomings and caveats in using this approach.

Comparison of knowledge scores of medical students in problem-based learning and traditional curriculum on public health topics

“…Mc Donald et al from Mc Master University determined an approach based on the community's main health problems and stressed the importance of focusing on these problems while designing their medical school's curriculum [7]. …”

Curriculum design of emergency medical services program at the College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences

“…The details of curriculum adoption and the various other related stages, including initial proposed curriculum, synchronization, adaptation, implementation, assessment, and evaluations24–27 are demonstrated in Tables 2–6. The various topics finally selected, objectives of studies 1 and 2 are also presented in the proposed initial and the final curriculum for the EMS program.…”

“…The breakdown of participants for study 2 was as follows: 25 emergency consultants; five paramedics; ten EMTs; and five medical educationists. The indicators suggested by McDonald et al24 were used for rating the problems: prevalence; 1-year case fatality rate; level of remaining quality of life; urgency of the illness condition; prevention (availability and applicability); diagnostic process (accuracy and applicability); intervention in established cases (efficacy); and educational impact (Appendix 1). …”

Social Accountability: A Framework for Medical Schools to Improve the Health of the Populations They Serve

“…Learners are given ample opportunities throughout their education to be acquainted with service requirements, and learning sites reflect the working environment. (99,100,101,102,103) Situation 3 depicts the optimal fit. Here educational institutions and health services share a common concern to reshape the health services delivery system to better meet people's health needs.…”