Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Acad Radiol ; 2022 Sep 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2265104

ABSTRACT

Mentorship is a fundamental part of professional and personal growth. Over time, the fabric of mentorship has been transforming from typical one-on-one mentor-mentee relationship to other types including peer, group, speed, and virtual mentoring. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, it caused major disruptions in many facets of life and career, including mentoring. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, live meetings were canceled, and social distancing measures were enacted at many institutions. Thus, the traditional set-up, with a face-to-face mentor and mentee interaction, was impossible. Many virtual platforms were utilized to navigate through these restrictions. In this review, we highlight challenges in mentorship during the COVID-19 pandemic and how we implemented different strategies to promote mentorship.

2.
J Comput Assist Tomogr ; 46(4): 614-620, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1784430

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The current undergraduate radiology education predominantly integrates radiology with other disciplines during preclerkship years and is often taught by nonradiologists. Early exposure to radiology and profound understanding of scientific fundamentals of imaging modalities and techniques are essential for a better understanding and interest in the specialty. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic-related impact on in-person medical education aggravated the need for alternative virtual teaching initiatives to provide essential knowledge to medical students. METHODS: The authors designed an online 7-session course on the principles of imaging modalities for medical students and fresh graduates in the United States and abroad. The course was delivered online and taught by radiologists from different US institutions. Pretests and posttests were delivered before and after each session, respectively, to assess change in knowledge. At the end of the course, a survey was distributed among students to collect their assessment and feedback. RESULTS: A total of 162 students and interns initially enrolled in the program by completing a sign-up interest form. An average of 65 participants attended each live session, with the highest attendance being 93 live attendees. An average of 44 attendees completed both the pretest and posttest for each session. There was a statistically significant increase in posttest scores compared with pretest scores ( P < 0.01) for each session; on average, the posttest scores were 48% higher than the pretest scores. A total of 84 participants answered the end-of-course survey. A total of 11% of the respondents described themselves as first year, 17% as second year, 18% as third year, 21% as fourth year, and 33% as "other." Attendees were enrolled in medical schools across 21 different countries with 35% of the respondents studying medicine in the United States. More than 76% of the respondents stated that they "strongly agree" that the program increased their understanding of radiology, increased their interest in radiology, and would be useful in their clinical practice in the future. Eighty-three percent of the respondents stated that they "strongly agree" that "this course was a worthwhile experience." Particularly, more than 84% of the respondents stated that among the most important components in enhancing their understanding of radiology were "the interpretation of normal imaging" and "interpretation of clinical cases." Ninety-two percent of the respondents stated that "the amount of effort to complete the requirements for this program was just right." Participants were also asked to rate each of the 8 sessions using the following scale: poor = 1 point, fair = 2, good = 3, and excellent = 4. The average rating for all 8 sessions was 3.61 points (SD = 0.55), which translates to 96% of the sessions being rated good or excellent. Eighty percent of the participants reported that the topics presented in the program were "excellent and clinically important to learn," and 20% of the participants reported that the topics presented were "good and somewhat important to learn." The participants were asked to evaluate their confidence regarding basic radiology skills before and after the program using the following scale: not confident at all = 1 point, somewhat confident = 2, moderately confident = 3, and very confident = 4. Figure 2 summarizes the responses of the participants. CONCLUSIONS: An online course to teach the fundamentals of imaging modalities could be delivered through a webinar format to medical students and interns in several countries to address the potential gaps in radiology education, therefore increasing their understanding of the different imaging modalities and their proper use in medicine.


Subject(s)
Education, Distance , Education, Medical, Undergraduate , Radiology , Students, Medical , COVID-19/epidemiology , Education, Medical, Undergraduate/organization & administration , Educational Measurement , Humans , Pandemics , Radiology/education , Students, Medical/psychology , United States/epidemiology
3.
Acad Radiol ; 29(9): 1432-1446, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1549616

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: We aimed to provide insights into the adaptive strategies, benefits, and challenges faced by the radiology programs during the 2021 residency virtual Match. Furthermore, we explored the potential impacts of related topics, such as diversity and social media use on the Match process and outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 31 questions was designed and distributed via e-mails to individuals involved radiology programs match process during the 2021 Match. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the results of most questions. Two questions comparing the changes in factors influencing the selection of applicants on a Likert scale of 1-5 were analyzed using paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test where p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Responses from 125 participants were analyzed. The following factors carried less weight in evaluating applicants during 2021 Match: away rotations (p < 0.01), no failed attempts in USMLE Step 1/CK (p < 0.01), grades in radiology clerkship (p < 0.04), and class rank/quartile (p < 0.04), while personal statements were more important (p < 0.03). Out of the 125 respondents, 80 (64%) and 58 (47%) strongly or somewhat agree on the effectiveness of virtual interviews in gauging applicants' candidacy and showing their programs' advantages, respectively. Advantages of virtual interviews included decreased cost, time flexibility, less faculty burden, and an increased number of offered interviews according to 81% (101/125), 46% (58/125), 40%, (50/125), and 34% (43/125), respectively. The most helpful platforms that showcased program advantages were program websites followed by Twitter and Instagram. CONCLUSION: Most radiology programs were able to adjust to the virtual interview process, and the majority agree on their effectiveness citing many benefits. However, there were mixed opinions if it could be sustained in future cycles.


Subject(s)
Internship and Residency , Radiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Radiography , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL