Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||The Merits and Challenges of Three-Year Medical School Curricula: Time for an Evidence-Based Discussion|
|Authors:||Raymond, John R;Kerschner, Joseph E;Hueston, William J;Maurana, Cheryl A|
|Abstract:||The debate about three-year medical school curricula has resurfaced recently, driven by rising education debt burden and a predicted physician shortage. In this Perspective, the authors call for an evidence-based discussion of the merits and challenges of three-year curricula. They examine published evidence that suggests that three-year curricula are viable, including studies on three-year curricula in (1) U.S. medical schools in the 1970s and 1980s, (2) two Canadian medical schools with more than four decades of experience with such curricula, and (3) accelerated family medicine and internal medicine programs. They also briefly describe the new three-year programs that are being implemented at eight U.S. medical schools, including their own. Finally, they offer suggestions regarding how to enhance the discussion between the proponents of and those with concerns about three-year curricula.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.|
|Appears in Collections:||Academic Medicine 2015|
Items in HannanDL are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.