Bespoke Radiology e-Learning

Introduction: Foundation doctors are expected to assess and interpret plain x-ray studies of the chest/abdomen before a definitive report is issued by senior staff. The Royal College of Radiologists have published guidelines (RCR curriculum) on the scope of plain film findings medical students should be familiar with.1 Studies have shown that the x-ray interpretation without feedback does not significantly improve diagnostic ability. 2 Queen’s University, Belfast Trust Radiology and Experior Medical developed an online system to assess individual student ability to interpret X-ray findings. Over a series of assessments each student’s profile is built up, identifying strengths and weakness. The system can then create bespoke individual assessments re-evaluating previously identified weak areas and quantifying interpretative skill improvement. Aim: To determine how readily an online system is adopted by senior medical students, investigating if increasing exposure to x-ray interpretation combined with cyclical formative feedback enhances performance. Methods: The system was offered to all 270 final year medical students as an online resource. The system comprised a series of 20 weekly 30 minute assessments, containing normal and abnormal x-rays within the RCR curriculum. After each assessment students were given formative feedback, including their own result, annotated answers, peer group comparison and a breakdown of areas of strength and weakness. Focus groups of 4-5 students addressed student perspectives of the system, including ease of use, image resolution, system performance across different operating platforms, perceived value of formative feedback loops, breakdown of performance and the value of bespoke personalised assessments. Research Ethics Approval was granted for the study. Data analysis was via two-sided one-sample t-test; initial minimal recruitment was estimated as 60 students, to detect a mean 10% change in performance, with a standard deviation of 20%. Results and Discussion: Over 80% (n = XXX/270) of the student cohort engaged with the study. Student baseline average was 39%, increasing to 62% by the exit test. The steadily sustained improvement (57% relative performance in interpretative diagnostic accuracy) was despite increasing test difficulty. Student feedback via focus groups was universally positive throughout the examined domains. Conclusion: The online resource proved to be valuable, with high levels of student engagement, improving performance despite increasingly difficulty testing and positive learner experience with the system. References: 1. Undergraduate Radiology Curriculum, The Royal College of Ra, April 2012. Ref No. BFCR(12)4 The Royal College of Radiologists, April 2012 2. I Satia, S Bashagha, A Bibi, R Ahmed, S Mellor, F Zaman. Assessing the accuracy and certainty in interpretating chest x-rays in the medical division. Clin Med August 2013 Vol.13 no. 4 349-352<br/>