Webb Emily M, Vella Maya, Straus Christopher M, Phelps Andrew, Naeger David M
Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Avenue, M-391, San Francisco, CA 94143-0628.
Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Avenue, M-391, San Francisco, CA 94143-0628.
Acad Radiol. 2015 Apr;22(4):520-6. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2014.11.005. Epub 2015 Jan 15.
There are little data as to whether appropriate, cost effective, and safe ordering of imaging examinations are adequately taught in US medical school curricula. We sought to determine the proportion of noninterpretive content (such as appropriate ordering) versus interpretive content (such as reading a chest x-ray) in the top-selling medical student radiology textbooks.
We performed an online search to identify a ranked list of the six top-selling general radiology textbooks for medical students. Each textbook was reviewed including content in the text, tables, images, figures, appendices, practice questions, question explanations, and glossaries. Individual pages of text and individual images were semiquantitatively scored on a six-level scale as to the percentage of material that was interpretive versus noninterpretive. The predominant imaging modality addressed in each was also recorded. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed.
All six books had more interpretive content. On average, 1.4 pages of text focused on interpretation for every one page focused on noninterpretive content. Seventeen images/figures were dedicated to interpretive skills for every one focused on noninterpretive skills. In all books, the largest proportion of text and image content was dedicated to plain films (51.2%), with computed tomography (CT) a distant second (16%). The content on radiographs (3.1:1) and CT (1.6:1) was more interpretive than not.
The current six top-selling medical student radiology textbooks contain a preponderance of material teaching image interpretation compared to material teaching noninterpretive skills, such as appropriate imaging examination selection, rational utilization, and patient safety.
关于美国医学院课程中是否充分教授了合适、具有成本效益且安全的影像学检查开单,相关数据很少。我们试图确定最畅销的医学生放射学教科书中非解释性内容(如合适的开单)与解释性内容(如阅读胸部X光片)的比例。
我们进行了在线搜索,以确定六本最畅销的医学生通用放射学教科书的排名列表。对每本教科书进行了审查,包括正文、表格、图像、图表、附录、练习题、问题解释和词汇表中的内容。对正文的单页和单个图像,就解释性与非解释性材料的百分比,在六级量表上进行半定量评分。还记录了每本教科书中涉及的主要成像方式。进行了描述性统计分析。
所有六本书都有更多的解释性内容。平均而言,每一页关注非解释性内容的正文,就有1.4页关注解释。每一个关注非解释性技能的图像/图表,就有17个用于解释性技能。在所有书籍中,正文和图像内容的最大比例用于平片(51.2%),计算机断层扫描(CT)远居第二(16%)。X光片(3.1:1)和CT(1.6:1)的内容解释性多于非解释性。
与教授非解释性技能(如合适的影像学检查选择、合理利用和患者安全)的材料相比,目前六本最畅销的医学生放射学教科书包含大量教授图像解释的材料。