METHOD: In 1995, using a language rating scale constructed by the authors, six standardized patients evaluated the English-language proficiencies of 127 second-year medical student undergraduates enrolled at the University of Adelaide, Australia, many of whom were from a non-English speaking background.
RESULTS: An earlier standardized test (Screening Test for Adolescent Language) had identified approximately one third of the students as potentially experiencing difficulties in using English in their training. Students so identified were rated lower than were their peers by the standardized patients.
CONCLUSION: The study proved useful both in identifying aspects of speech that can be reasonably rated by standardized patients and also in identifying students who might benefit from language interventions. Replication studies with the new instrument are required to further establish its reliability, validity, and generalizability across different student cohorts.
METHOD: This cross-sectional study used a questionnaire to survey final-year medical students at one school in 1999. It tested students' patient-centeredness, "patient-care" values, and degree of comfort in performing certain intimate physical examinations.
RESULTS: Women students were more patient-centered than were men students. Both genders were more attuned to the concerns of patients of their own gender, were more comfortable with personal rather than sexual issues, and were more uncomfortable with performing more intimate examinations upon the opposite gender. Using comparable case studies, it was also shown that the female student-female patient dyad had significantly greater "patient-care" values than did the male student-male patient dyad.
CONCLUSION: Medical students did not behave in a gender-neutral way in the consultation. There is a powerful interaction between a student's gender and a patient's gender. This warrants further investigation in the real clinical situation because it has implications on the outcomes of the consultation.
METHODS: A mixed method design was used. Fourth-year medical students participated in a consultation/liaison psychiatry service to two government-operated primary care clinics. Each student attended two half-day consultations to the clinics during the psychiatry clinical clerkship. Students joined in discussions with primary care clinicians, performed supervised clinical assessments, and administered a depression screening instrument. The learning experience was evaluated through four focus groups, each with 9-10 participants, held throughout the academic year. An end-of-year, anonymous, online questionnaire survey was administered to the entire class. Thematic analysis of focus group transcripts was performed and quantitative statistics were calculated (Stata version 13).
RESULTS: Focus group themes included the following: (a) active learning opportunities in primary care psychiatry consultation had perceived added educational value, (b) students benefited from contact with patients with previously undiagnosed common mental disorders, and (c) students' primary care experience raised their awareness of societal and professional responsibilities. Of the class of 113 students, 93 (82%) responded to the questionnaire. The survey responses reflected the qualitative themes, with 79 respondents (85%) stating that the learning experience met or exceeded their expectations.
CONCLUSIONS: Academic psychiatry has been criticized for its overreliance on secondary care settings in undergraduate clinical teaching. Our findings suggest that supervised clinical placements in primary care are feasible and provide added educational value as a routine component of the undergraduate psychiatry clinical clerkship.