Pre Clinic Grade and Clinic Periods Effect on Progress Test of UNISMA Medical Profession Students
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: Pre clinic grade point is often seen as predictor of good performance in professional education whose short term goal is to pass national examination which command progress test to evaluate the preparation.
Purpose: To know the effect of pre clinic grade point and clinical study periods in progress test result of medical profession students.
Methods: 135 students of medical profession programme completed computer based progress test of 200 national standardized questions in 200 minutes using siPENA software. Progress test result then analysed based on how long they have been studied and their pre clinic grade point using ANOVA – Tukey HSD and Pearson correlation in SPSS for Windows ver 19
Results: Although students with pre clinic grade 2,50-2,74 have lower progress test result, but it’s not statistically significant (p>0,05). The same happen in clinic study periods with the longer the students in their clinical rotation, the better their result (p>0,05). The trends which showing better result in higher pre clinic grade point and time they spend in clinical rotation agrees with previous studies.
Conclusion: Pre clinic grade point and clinic study periods has little to no effect on progress test result of medical profession students in UNISMA.
Downloads
Article Details
Copyright (c) 2021 Ariani Ratri Dewi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Wrigley W VC, Freeman A, Muijtjens A. A systemic framework for the progress test: Strengths, constraints and issues: AMEE Guide No. 71. Med Teach 2012;34:683–97.
Wilkinson D ZJ, Byrne GJ, Luke H, Ozolins IZ, Parker MH, Peterson RF. Medical school selection criteria and the prediction of academic performance. MJA. 2008;188:349–54.
Poole P SB, Rudland J, Wilkinson T. Comparison of UMAT scores and GPA in prediction of performance in medical school: a national study. Med Edu 2012;46:163–71.
Carr SE CA, Puddey IB, Lake F. . Relationships between academic performance of medical students and their workplace performance as junior doctors. BMC Med Edu 2014;14.
Ferguson E JD, Madeley L. Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature. BMJ. 2002;324:952–7.
Shawwa L AA, Abulaban A, Balkhoyor AH. Factors potentially influencing academic performance among medical students. Adv Med Educ Pract 2015;6:65-75.
Musa MR HM. Academic performance of academic performance of pre-clinical and clinical medical students’ of east coast Malaysian peninsula: a cross-sectional and descriptive study that stimulates their life. J Appl Pharm Sci 2017;7(06):169-75.
McManus IC RP, Winder BC, Sproston KA. Clinical experience, performance in final examinations, and learning style in medical students: prospective study. BMJ. 1998;316:345-50.
McManus IC SE, Partridge P, Keeling A, Fleming PA. A levels and intelligence as predictors of medical careers in UK doctors: 20 year prospective study. BMJ. 2003;327:139-42.
Mathers J PJ, Scully E, Popovic C. A comparison of medical students’ perceptions of their initial basic clinical training placements in ‘new’ and established teaching hospitals. Med Teach. 2006;28(3):e80–e9.