Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1 Departments of Physiology
2 Departments of Physiology and Community Medicine, Government Medical College, Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir, India
3 Department of Physiology, Acharya Shri Chandra Medical College and Hospital, Sidhra, Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir, India
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Advances in scientific research necessitates updating of the curriculum and
the Medical Council of India now Board of Governors have proposed a new competency‑based
undergraduate curriculum for the Indian Medical Graduate. The authors wanted the views of medical
students about basic sciences teaching in the form of feedback, their perceptions and attitudes toward
the basic sciences and their opinions about the relevance of these subjects, and finally any ideas
about improvement in teaching of basic sciences.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present cross‑sectional study was conducted in two medical
colleges of Northern India and 250 medical students from each medical school were the study
participants. Students of the 1st year were not included, but interns were included. A pretested
questionnaire having twenty questions with answers in the form of “yes” and “no” was used. Chi‑square
was the test of significance.
RESULTS: Almost all the participants considered the basic sciences as an integral part of medical
curriculum and a higher number of Government Medical College respondents opined that their
knowledge made it easier to understand clinical subjects (P < 0.05). However, higher proportion of
ASCOMS (Acharya Shri Chandra College Medical Sciences) of respondents emphasized that the
focus should be on clinical subjects and that current student–teacher ratio be increased (P < 0.05).
Majority of the respondents labeled Anatomy having the immense syllabus, while Physiology was
designated as more relevant and having a better recall during clinical discourse (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Basic sciences lay strong foundation for subsequent clinical learning. Medical
education is best taught with hybrid use of lectures, tutorial, group discussions, audio‑visual aids, and
integrated teaching. The new proposed competency‑based curriculum and the Attitudes, Ethics and
Communication Module are likely to improve the overall medical education and health‑care scenario.
Keywords
the pre‑clinical curriculum during clinical practice: Interns’
perspective in a government medical college. Int J Anat Res
2017;5:3379‑83.
2. Gade S, Chari S. Perception of teachers towards performance
of undergraduate medical students in physiology practical and
syllabus content. J Educ Tech Health Sci 2015;2:28‑31.
3. D’Eon MF. Knowledge loss of medical students on first year basic
science courses at the University of Saskatchewan. BMC Med
Educ 2006;6:5.
4. Chawla O, Bhattacharjee M, Kansal NK. Students’ perspective of
the MBBS physiology curriculum. South East Asian J Med Educ
2012;6:29‑33.
5. Michael J. Where’s the evidence that active learning works? Adv
Physiol Educ 2006;30:159‑67.
6. Das BP, Sethi A, Rauniar GP, Sangarula H. Student’s critical
appraisal on the evaluation of analgesics in laboratory animal
verses simulated clinical trail. Nepal Med Coll J 2006;8:234‑7.
7. Yograj S, Bhat AN, Gupta G, Kalsotra L, Gupta RK. Assessing the
existing learning methodology in physiology: A feedback study
from students of two medical colleges in Northern India. Indian
J Anat Physiol 2016;3:260‑4.
8. Harden RM. AMEE Guide 21: Curriculum mapping a tool for
transparent and authentic teaching and learning. Evaluating
the outcomes of undergraduate medical education. Med Educ
2003;37:580‑1.
9. Badyal DK, Singh T. Teaching of the basic sciences in medicine:
Changing trends. Natl Med J India 2015;28:137‑40.
10. Medical Council of India. Competency based Undergraduate
curriculum for the Indian medical graduate. 2018;1:25.
11. Elkhair EB, Alharbi WD. How do the female preclinical medical
students at Umm Al‑Qura university study physiology? Int J Sci
Commun Hum 2014;2:40‑6.
12. Sentí M, Miralles R, Bigorra J, Girvent M, Minguella J, Samso E,
et al. A collaborative project to bridging the gap between basic and
clinical teachers: The opinion of medical students. Bio Educ 2015:9.
Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/620348. [Last
accessed on 2019 Jan 12].
13. Shah DK, Jha RK, Sah K, Sah P, Paudel K, Paudel P, et al. Students’
attitudes and perception towards basic sciences in a medical
school of Nepal: A cross‑sectional study. J Contemp Med Educ
2015;3:165‑9.
14. Shanker PR, Dubey AK, Subish P, Upadhyay DK. Medical student
attitudes towards and perception of the basic sciences in a medical
college in Western Nepal. Med Sci Educ 2007;17:67‑73.
15. Yograj S, Bhat AN, Gupta G, Kalsotra L, Gupta RK, Arora A.
Approach of medical students to physiology: A feedback study
from two medical schools in a Sub‑Himalayan state of India. Int
J Sci Res 2018;7:52‑5.
16. Vogel WH. Relevance of “irrelevant” facts in medical education:
The value of basic science teaching for later medical practice.
Acad Med 1993;68:S27‑8.
17. Miner FC Jr., Das H, Gale J. An investigation of the relative
effectiveness of three diverse teaching methodologies. Organ
Behav Teach Rev 1984;9:49‑59.
18. Jha RK, Paudel KR, Shah DK, Sah AK, Basnet S, Sah P. Subject
preferences of first‑ and second‑year medical students for their
future specialization at Chitwan medical college and teaching
hospital, Chitwan, Nepal – A questionnaire‑based study. Adv
Med Educ Pract 2015;6:609‑13.
19. Oyebola DD, Adewoye OE. Preference of preclinical medical
students for medical specialties and the basic medical sciences.
Afr J Med Med Sci 1998;27:209‑12.
20. Zia S, Abbas M, Sulaiman M, Sheikh SM. Career choices of medical
doctors at graduate level – A multicenter study. Pak J Med Sci
2017;33:1086‑90.
21. Toppo NA, Lazarus M, Seth RJ, Bhargava OP, Yadav KS,
Kasar PK. Introduction of integrated teaching learning module in
second M.B.B.S. curriculum. Int J Contemp Med Res 2016;3:1275‑9.
22. Shah S, Saiyad S, Mahajan N. Introduction of integrated teaching
in 1st MBBS: Perspective of students. Int J Basic App Physiol
2014;3:349‑52.
23. Harden RM. The integration ladder: A tool for curriculum
planning and evaluation. Med Educ 2000;34:551‑7.
24. Woods NN, Neville AJ, Levinson AJ, Howey EH, Oczkowski WJ,
Norman GR. The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis. Acad
Med 2006;81:S124‑7.
25. Gupta S, Gupta AK, Verma M, Kaur H, Kaur A, Singh K. The
attitudes and perceptions of medical students towards basic
science subjects during their clinical years: A cross‑sectional
survey. Int J Appl Basic Med Res 2014;4:16‑9.
26. El‑Belbasy R, Abo‑Elmagd EK, Abd‑Rabo M. Medical students’
attitude and perception towards basic medical sciences in the
faculty of medicine for girls, Al‑Azhar University: A study prior
to integrated program. Egypt J Hosp Med 2018;70:2043‑50.
27. Nuggedalla MA. A perception and significance of basic sciences
for clinical studies. Int J Hum Anat 2018;1:26‑32.
28. Spencer AL, Brosenitsch T, Levine AS, Kanter SL. Back to the
basic sciences: An innovative approach to teaching senior medical
students how best to integrate basic science and clinical medicine.
Acad Med 2008;83:662‑9.
29. Medical Council of India. Competency based undergraduate
curriculum for the Indian medical graduate. 2018;1:11‑2.
)